1 Appln 211-2011 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.211 OF 2011 Indapur Urban Co-operative Bank .Applicant Ltd. V/s. Pandurang Hariba Shinde & anr. .Respondents Mr.Rahul Kadam, Advocate, for the Applicant Mrs.U.V.Kejariwal, APP, for Respondent No.2 - State CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 28TH JULY, 2011 P.C. . Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2. This is an application for leave to file an Appeal against Judgment of acquittal of respondent No.1 rendered by the learned Judicial Magistrate F. C., Indapur, District Pune. In this case, the applicant - Co- operative Bank had filed a complaint about dishonour of a cheque. The learned Magistrate held on all points in favour of the applicant 2 Appln 211-2011 except on the point of limitation. The learned Magistrate held that there was delay of 15 or 16 days where as the applicant had sought condonation of delay of only 12 days and therefore, held that the delay of 12 days only was condoned, and since delay was of 15 days, the complaint was barred by limitation. Initially when the complaint was filed, an application for condonation of delay was filed which was allowed by the learned Magistrate without issuing any notice to the respondent. The respondent took the matter in Revision before the Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Judge, rather than deciding the question once for all, kept the question open to be decided at the time of trial. This is how the complainant has landed in this trouble. The learned Magistrate should have seen that after reasons for condonation of delay were found to be sufficient, arithmetical computation of days should not have been so material to result in complaint 3 Appln 211-2011 itself being dismissed, particularly, after recording findings in favour of the complainant on all the points. In view of this, leave granted. 3. Admit. 4. Call for R & P. 5. Action under Section 390. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)