( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2597 OF 2008 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2598 OF 2008 Babanrao s/o Wetalrao Jawale APPLICANT VERSUS Shahuraj s/o Khanderao Khose RESPONDENT ..... Mr. S.N. Janakwar, advocate holding for Mr. P.R. Katneshwarkar, advocate for the applicant. Mr. Deepak Sharma, advocate holding for Mr. V.D. Salunke, advocate for respondent. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 9th September, 2009] PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. These are applications for condonation of delay and leave to appeal. 3. So far as condonation of delay is concerned, it may be stated that the applicant seeks condonation on the ground that he was required to attend wife of his close friend by name Shri Pradeep Deshmukh, as she was ( 2 ) suffering from cancer and was shifted to Mumbai for medical treatment. He was required to stay with his friend at Mumbai during the relevant period. There is delay of 72 days. No reply is filed. It appears from the impugned judgement itself that said Pradeep Deshmukh is bosom friend of the applicant. It is the statement of the applicant on oath that the delay is due to such reasons shown in paragraph No. 3 of the application and the same is unintentional. I accept the explanation. The delay is condoned. 4. As regards leave to appeal, the defence of the respondent was that there was coercion used by the applicant and his friend Pradeep Deshmukh and, therefore, he was forced to open an account with Priyadarshani Urban Cooperative Bank Limited on 5th July, 2003. He alleged that his cheque book was taken by said Pradeep Deshmukh and the cheque was misused. The cheque in question is for Rs. two (2) lacs on face value thereof. The applicant admitted that he is a contractor. The respondent is Chairman of the Labours’ Cooperative Society. The question whether blank cheque was forcibly obtained by Pradeep Deshmukh from the ( 3 ) respondent and was misused by the applicant is required to be examined on basis of the material placed on record. Considering the fact that presumption of law under section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act needs to be appropriately rebutted and the defence of the respondent needs to be scrutinized by giving a fresh look to the matter. Hence, leave to appeal is granted. 5. Both the applications are allowed. 6. Admit the appeal. 7. Call for record and proceedings. 8. Print is dispensed with. 9. The appellant to furnish private paper-book within ten (10) weeks. 10. Mr. Sharma, advocate, waives service for the respondent. 11. Liberty to mention for expeditious hearing. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/criapln2597-2598-08