1 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.966 OF 2011 Bharat Pranjivandas Shroff .Applicant V/s. Sapphire Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. .Respondents & ors WITH MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.967 OF 2011 Bharat Pranjivandas Shroff .Applicant V/s. Agnello Fernandes & anr. .Respondents WITH MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.968 OF 2011 Smt.Rupa Bharat Shroff .Applicant V/s. Sapphire Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. .Respondents & ors WITH MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.969 OF 2011 Bharat Pranjivandas Shroff .Applicant V/s. Agnello Fernandes & anr. .Respondents Mr.Unmesh Breed i/b. Mr.A.B.Lawand, Advocate, for the Applicants Mr.Neville Deboo, Advocate, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 Mrs.P.P.Bhosale, APP, for the Respondent - State CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 1ST DECEMBER, 2011 2 P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. These are the applications for condonation of delay of 63 days, in seeking leave to file an appeal against acquittal of the respondents for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 21st Court, Bandra, Mumbai, on the ground that the applicant had preferred an appeal before the Sessions Court which was not competent to entertain it. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 states that the applicant had withdrawn the appeal before the Sessions Court without seeking any liberty to file this appeal. Therefore, he has an objection to entertain the appeal. Since the Sessions Court could not have entertained the appeal against the respondents' acquittal, it's withdrawal 3 without seeking any liberty is inconsequential. Considering the reasons given in the applications, Miscellaneous Applications are allowed. Delay is condoned. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)