1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 428 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2010. (Hukmichand Hiralal Nimodia .v. Prashant Sahebrao Raut) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri S.C. Bhalerao, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Manoj Karia, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE, J. 05TH OCTOBER, 2010. Heard. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the learned trial Court has committed an error in appreciation of the evidence. He invites my attention to para 7 of the judgment of the learned trial Court. The Court has discussed about the difference in the signature. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the exercise was futile and there was no need to undertake the exercise of verifying the signature. He places the reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of L.C. Goyal .v. Suresh Joshi (Mrs) and others (reported in 1999 (3) SCC 376). Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the cheque was returned on the ground of insufficient funds and as such there was no need to undertake the exercise of verifying the signature. In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the applicant and the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court, leave granted. Criminal Application is allowed. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2010 Heard Shri S.C. Bhalerao, the learned Counsel for the appellant and Shri Manoj Karia, the learned Counsel for the respondent. 2 Admit. Call for R and P. JUDGE *rrg.