1 (6) Appln 949/10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Amk CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 949 OF 2010 Dhiraj Kumar Jain .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents Mr. K. R. Iyengar for the Applicant. Mrs. M. M. Deshmukh, APP for the Respondent State. Mr. Vijay Gharat for Respondent No.2. CORAM : MRS. ROSHAN DALVI, J. Date : 26th April, 2011. P.C. 1. This application for leave to file Appeal from the order of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The question of limitation has been considered. It was raised for the first time in Appeal. Consequent upon that question being raised, the Complainant has sought to show how the complaint was not barred by limitation. That fact was not shown by the Complainant in the trial itself. The plea of the limitation was not taken in the trial itself. 2. On merits whatever be the facts of the case can and must be looked by the Court when the contention of law is raised. The Applicant/complainant has sought to show an envelope bearing certain postal marks showing the receipt of the notice of demand sent to the accused/respondent. That aspect would have to be considered based on the dates shown on the envelope. It has been considered instead upon the fact that the 2 (6) Appln 949/10 Applicant had stated that packet was not traceable and later shown that it was traced pending the trial. 3. The Court is concerned with the truth of the facts of each case. At the final hearing, technicality cannot prevail. Hence leave to Appeal is granted. This aspect shall be considered in Appeal. 4. Appeal shall come up for admission on 16th June, 2011. Applicant to serve notice upon the Respondents by RPAD/UPC. Applicant to serve by private notice. Notice to state that the Appeal shall be disposed of at the stage of admission. (ROSHAN DALVI, J.)