1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.334 OF 2011 Ms.Suchitra Vijay Kher and others Applicants versus M/s.Ramnord Research Lab. and others Respondents Mr.Filji Frederick i/by FF & Associates for applicants. Mr.D.P.Adsule, APP for State. CORAM : RANJIT MORE, J. DATE : 13th December 2011 PC : 1. Heard learned counsel for respective parties. Respondent no.1 is the complainant in Criminal case filed against applicants and respondents 2 to 4. The process was issued by the learned Magistrate on 28th April 2008 in Case No.45/SW/2009. The order of issuance of process was challenged by the present applicants by filing Revision Application No. 1038 of 2010. Learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the revision application on 8th March 2011 and therefore, present application is filed under the provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the cheque in question was not given to the complainant in discharge of any liability and therefore, sought quashing the complaint. The submission cannot be accepted. Under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, cheques are presumed to have been given in discharge of due liability. Of course, the applicants-original accused are at liberty to rebut this presumption. The rebuttal can be at the stage of trial after leading evidence on record. Same cannot be a ground for quashing the complaint or order issuing process. 2 3. In this view of the matter, the criminal application is without any merit and the same stands dismissed. (RANJIT MORE, J.)