1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No.2884 of 2007 (Shri Commodity Exchange and another v. Rajesh Parasmal Shrishrimal Shrimal (Jain) ) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Shri R.L. Khapre, Advocate for Applicants. Shri A.H. Lohita, Advocate for Non-Applicant. CORAM : R.C. Chavan, J. DATE : 19th January, 2009 This applicant seeks leave to file appeal against the judgment of acquittal rendered by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Yavatmal, whereby the learned Magistrate acquitted the non-applicant of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act holding that the applicant failed to prove that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable liability. I have heard both the learned counsel for the applicants and the non-applicants. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the learned Trial Judge was in error in holding that the cheque was not proved to have been issued for a legally enforceable liability. In this case, the cheque had been issued on 7-5-2005. However, the learned Trial Magistrate held that the cheque Exhibit 45 was in fact issued in the year 1998 and the date was 2 scored and changed over to 7-5-2005. This conclusion has been drawn after considering the evidence tendered in the case, which cannot be said to be erroneous. There is also a change in the account number. In view of this, since the conclusions drawn by the learned Magistrate cannot be said to be perverse or erroneous, leave is refused. Appeal is dismissed. JUDGE pdl