IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4139 OF 2006, CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4140 OF 2006, CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4141 OF 2006 AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4142 OF 2006 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, office memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or Judge’s orders. orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Mr.G.M.Savagave for the applicant. Mr.Viresh V. Purwant for respondent nos.5, 8, 10, 12, 13 and 15 to 18. Mr.Prashant Kulkarni for respondent no.9. Mr.J.P.Yagnik, A.P.P for the State. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 29th January 2009. : 29th January 2009. : 29th January 2009. P.C.: . Heard the learned advocate for the applicant. I have also heard the learned advocate appearing for the respondent nos.5, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15 to 18 as well as the learned advocate appearing for the respondent nos.7 and 9. 2. It is not in dispute that facts of these applications are more or less similar. The 1st respondent is a Co-operative Bank. The 2nd respondent was the Chairman of the said bank at the relevant time. The 3rd and 4th respondents are the signatories to the cheque in dispute. Looking to the findings recorded by the learned Judge, a case (2) is made out for grant of special leave to prefer an appeal as against the 1st respondent. The 2nd respondent being Chairman and 3rd to 4th respondents being the signatories to the cheque will be liable under section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881. 3. The respondent nos.5 to 18 have been made accused by invoking section 141 of the said Act of 1881. In view of the finding recorded by the learned Magistrate in paragraph 11 of the judgment that there was no evidence adduced to show that the respondent nos.5 to 18 were officials of the 1st respondent bank at the relevant time, no case is made out for grant of leave against the said respondents. 4. Hence, applications are dismissed as against the respondent nos.5 to 18. Special leave to prefer an appeal is granted confined to 1st to 4th respondents. Appeal is admitted in so far as the said four respondents are concerned. Call for record and proceedings. (A.S.Oka, J)