1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR . CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.40 OF 2010. VIJAY VITHALRAO JAGTAP VS TANACHAND TARACHAND WANKHEDE ______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri A. D. Giradkar, Advocate for the appellant. Shri A. I. Shaikh, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM : A.H. JOSHI, J. DATE : 18th MARCH, 2010. 1. Heard. 2. Perused the record. It is seen that the judgment and order of acquittal is based on the finding namely the Cheque which was dishonoured was for a sum of Rs.1,27,600/-. However, actual liability which was proved is to the tune of Rs.81,000/-. In this background, the accused was not bound to honour the cheque of amount higher than the liability. 2. In the result, the liability corresponding to the amount of cheque did not exist. Therefore, the accused cannot be held to be guilty of the offence complained of. 2 3. The judgment of acquittal cannot be faulted as erroneous or perverse. 4. There is no merit in the appeal and is dismissed. Judge //mule//