1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3898 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL ST.NO.750 OF 2007 Abdul Hakim s/o Abdul Jalil Applicant Versus Abdul Karim s/o Abdul Nabi Respondent Mr.R.V.Gore, advocate for the applicant. Mr.V.P.Latange, advocate for the Respondent CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 03rd July, 2009. P.C.: 1 Heard Shri Gore, learned Counsel for the applicant and Shri V.P.Latange, learned Counsel for the Respondent. 2 Appellant herein – original complainant is raising exception to the order of acquittal dated 11.09.2007, recorded by 7 th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parbhani, in Summary Criminal Case No.1265/2004, thereby directing acquittal of the accused – Respondent herein for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 3 It is the case of complainant that he advanced an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the accused towards hand loan. The accused, towards repayment of hand loan amount, has given cheque bearing date 12.04.2004. On presentation of the said cheque to the Bank, it was returned with an endorsement that accused has not maintained sufficient funds in the account. The complainant, therefore, lodged complaint, 2 which was registered as Summary Criminal Case No.1265/2004. 4 After recording evidence of the parties, learned trial Judge came to the conclusion that complainant has not established his case, as such, acquitted the accused. 5 I have perused the judgment and order passed by the trial Court. It transpires on perusal of the judgment that the complainant has failed to establish that amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was lent to the accused towards legally enforceable liability. Secondly, the cheque return memo has not been placed on record by the complainant. The cheque at Exhibit-26 is completely torn from middle portion. Considering all these aspects, trial Court did not find favour with the case of complainant. The reasons recorded by the trial Court appear to be reasonable and based on appreciation of evidence placed on record. Merely because some other view is also possible, in the facts and circumstances of this case, is not a ground for causing interference in the order of acquittal. Appeal is devoid of merit. 6 Application seeking leave to file appeal, therefore, stands rejected. Consequently, appeal also stands rejected. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* adb/criappln389807