IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 29 OF 2008 MR. VAMAN R. NAIK ... Petitioner Versus STATE (THROUGH LD. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) AND ANR., ... Respondents Mr. Anthony D'silva, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. W. Coutinho, Public Prosecutor for the respondent no.1. Coram:- C. L. PANGARKAR, J. Date:- 6th February, 2009 P.C. Heard. This revision is preferred by the accused who was convicted by Trial Judge, Mapusa under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of 3 months and to pay compensation of Rs.5,20,000/-. 2. The accused felt aggrieved by this order and preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Panaji who dismissed the appeal by concurring with the findings recorded by the Trial Judge. 3. The counsel for the applicant mainly contended before this Court that the Courts below failed to consider the defence of the accused. He stated that such a transaction is hit by Foreign Exchange Management Regulations and the liability was not legally enforcebale liability. 4. The learned Sessions Judge found that the case does not fall within the scope of Foreign Exchange Management Regulations, 2000. He found that the complainant had advanced a friendly loan. The case of the complainant since beginning is of advancing a friendly loan. It is not shown from the evidence that the complainant had advanced money as his own capital for business. In view of this, I do not find any error in the findings of the Trial Judge and the Sessions Judge that the liability is a legally enforceable liability. 5. There are two concurrent findings by the Courts below and I do not find any substance in this revision and revision is dismissed. C. L. PANGARKAR, J. lh/.