1 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1097 OF 2011 Mangesh Shankar Salunke .Applicant V/s. Arun Maruti Kumbhar & anr. .Respondents Mr.S.N.More, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr.S.B.Chandan, Advocate, for Respondent No.1 Smt.V.R.Bhosale, APP, for Respondent No.2 - State CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 19TH DECEMBER, 2011 P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. This is an application for leave to file an appeal against acquittal of respondent No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The learned Magistrate held that the complainant failed to prove that the accused had issued a cheque towards discharge of any legally 2 enforceable liability. For coming to this conclusion the learned Magistrate held that neither the complainant nor his father could show that they had ` 90,000/- on the day on which the advance was made. Whether the complainant or his father had ` 90,000/- on the day on which the advance was made may not have been relevant for deciding the case. In view of this, leave granted. Admit. Call for R & P. Action under Section 390 stands dispensed with, since the learned counsel for respondent No.1 states that he would represent the respondent. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)