1 crapn2976.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2976 OF 2010 Shri. Nitin VItthal Choudhary, Age: 47 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Behind Kumbhar Khunt, Old Dhule, Dhule. ...APPLICANT VERSUS Shri. Mahendra Purushottam Badgujar, Age: 53 years, Occ: Agriculture & Business, R/o. Badgujar Galli, Old Dhule, Dhule. ...RESPONDENT ... Mr. Shrikant S. Patil, Advocate for applicant. Mr. Mukul Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent sole. ... CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 11TH FEBRUARY, 2011 PER COURT : . Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Counsel for the respondent. 2 crapn2976.10 2. Perused the impugned judgment and order and evidence brought on record by the prosecution. 3. Upon perusal of the impugned judgment and evidence brought on record by the prosecution, it does indicate that except affidavit of the applicant, no other document is placed on record by the applicant to support his case. There was no any agreement or any document showing any transaction between the applicant and respondent. Only affidavit of the applicant was on record and that cheque was blank cheque. The trial Court has considered the case of the complainant. The respondent had taken defence that he had no any financial transaction with the applicant. However, he had some transaction with one Ravi Kale and blank cheque was given to him. It is the defence of the respondent that the cheque issued by the respondent, was issued to Ravi Kale. The respondent has also placed on record copy of the complaint filed against Ravi Kale. The 3 crapn2976.10 respondent, in his affidavit, has also stated about civil dispute between Ravi Kale and himself. 4. The respondent has also produced on record copy of the Income tax returns of the applicant for the financial year 01-04-2003 to 31-03-2004 and 01-04-2004 to 31-03-2005. It was brought on record that for financial year 01-04-2003 to 31-03-2004 total income shown in the Income tax return is Rs.1,24,000/- and for another financial year, total income is shown Rs. 1,75,000/-. The trial Court has discussed the said aspect in Para-19 and reached to the conclusion that if the income of the applicant for the financial year 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 was Rs.1,24,000/- and Rs.1,75,000/- respectively, in that case, how it was possible for the applicant to pay amount of Rs.4,90,000/- to the respondent. According to the Counsel for the applicant, said amount was paid in the month of July 2004. Even if this contention of the Counsel for the applicant is accepted, extract of income tax 4 crapn2976.10 return brought on record, does indicate that from 2003 to 2005 total income of the applicant was about roughly about Rs.3,00,000/-. It is admitted position that except affidavit of the complainant, nothing was placed on record to show that such amount was advanced to the respondent. 5. In my opinion, the trial Court considered entire evidence and reached to the correct conclusion. No interference is warranted. Hence, application seeking leave to appeal stands rejected. 6. Registry to send back the original Record and Proceedings to the concerned Court, forthwith. [ S.S. SHINDE, J.] sut/feb11/crapn2976.10