1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR . CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.542 OF 2009. RAJESH GANESH BAISWARE VS SANDIP RAFGHUNATH THAWARE ______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri S. V. Sirpurkar, Advocate for the applicant. Shri R. P. Joshi, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM : A.H. JOSHI, J. DATE : 18th MARCH, 2010. 1. Heard. 2. Perused the record tendered with the appeal memo. 3. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, recorded the finding in favour of the complainant and convicted the accused. The appellate Court has allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused. While acquitting, the learned Appellate Court held that the Trial Court lost sight of the fact that the complainant has failed to prove that there existed liability. 4. The appellate Court had recorded this finding on the basis of sum effect of the nature 2 of transaction between the parties, and that the complainant was doing the transaction in the nature of money lending, and also that the cheque subject matter was not issued for discharge of existing civil liability. 5, The finding recorded by the learned Sessions Judge are seen to be based on preponderance of probabilities as emerging from the evidence on record. The findings which are based on preponderance of probabilities cannot be reversed in appeal against acquittal barely for asking. Those need to be shown to be perverse. Nothing of this sort is shown. 6. In the result, the appeal has no merit, and is, therefore, rejected. Judge //mule//