1 Cri.Appln.No.629 of 2011 hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 629 OF 2011 Rashmi Education Society ... Applicant Versus Shree Veershaiv Coop. Bank Ltd. and anr. ... Respondents Mr. Kamlesh Mali, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. D.R. More, A.P.P. for State. CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL,J. DATED : AUGUST 17, 2011 P.C. Heard the leaned counsel for the applicant. 2. The applicant claims that the cheque was presented for enacashment at Pune and therefore, the court at Pune only had jurisdiction to entertain prosecution in the matter of Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. Having gone through the orders of the learned J.M.F.C. as well the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur, it is explicit that paragraph 8 records that cheque was presented at Kolhapur. Though this 2 Cri.Appln.No.629 of 2011 aspect is disputed by the learned counsel, however, this court is not expected to go into said enquiry at this stage. The position in law is clear as held in the matter of K. Bhaskaran Vs. Sankaran Vidhyan Balan, AIR 1999 S.C. 3762 and in the judgment of Harmans Electronics (P) Ltd. AIR 2009 SC 1168. Considering the factual situation the orders under challenge cannot be said to be erroneous or perverse calling for interference. There is no merit in the application which is accordingly dismissed. (K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.)