1 Appln336.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION kj CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.336 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.474 OF 2010 A N D CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.337 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.475 OF 2010 Mr.Yashwant Digambar Dharmadhikari ..Applicant Vs Mr.Shrikrishna Dattatraya Deo & Anr. ..Respondents ---- Mr.Amit Sale i/by Tejas Dande for the applicant. Mr.A.S.Shitole APP for the respondent/State. ---- Coram : V.M.KANADE,J Date : 11.10.2010. PC 1 Heard the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant and the learned APP for the State. The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of 2 Appln336.10.sxw Negotiable Instruments Act, by the trial Court and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 5,50,000/-. This was however, modified by the appellate Court and sentence was enhanced to one year. Against the said order, the applicant has preferred revision applications. It is submitted that both the Courts below have committed a patent error in not taking into consideration the admissions given by the Complainant in the cross-examination. The applicant and the complainant were partners of the partnership firm and Memorandum of Understanding was executed by all the three partners, wherein it was resolved that the partnership firm would be dissolved and the applicant would pay to the Complainant his share of Rs.5,50,000/- each in both the applications. The cheques which were given by the applicant were dis-honoured and therefore, complaint was filed. It is submitted that the complainant in his cross-examination has admitted that the Memorandum of Understanding was not acted upon and the complainant continued to be the partner of the said firm. It was therefore, submitted that this admission was not considered by both the Courts below. He submitted that in view of 3 Appln336.10.sxw the continuation of the complainant as a partner, there was no question of payment of his share and therefore, the said cheques could not be said to have been issued for an existing date or liability. In my view, under these circumstances, applicant deserves to be released on bail. The applicant be released on bail on execution of PR bond in the sum of Rs.5,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount. Applications for bail accordingly disposed of. (V.M.KANADE,J) 4 Appln336.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.474 OF 2010 CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.475 OF 2010 Mr.Yashwant Digambar Dharmadhikari ..Applicant Vs. Mr.Shrikrishna Dattatraya Deo & Anr. ..Respondents ---- Mr.Amit Sale i/by Tejas Dande for the applicant. Mr.A.S.Shitole APP for the respondent/State. ---- Coram : V. M. KANADE,J Date : 11.10.2010 PC 1 Issue notice to the respondent no.1 returnable after four weeks. (V.M.KANADE,J)