APEAL.89-01 - 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 89 OF 2001 Sunil Dinkarrao Thorat ...Appellant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondents *** None for the Appellant. Mr. P. S. Hingorani, APP for Respondent No.1. None for Respondent No.2. *** CORAM: V. M. KANADE J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 6, 2010 P.C. . None appears for the appellant as well as respondent No.2. Heard the learned APP for respondent No.2. The learned APP has taken me through the judgment and order of the trial Court and also the notes of evidence which were brought on record. A complaint filed by the appellant for the offence punishable under S. 138 Negotiable Instruments Act has been dismissed by the trial Court and the accused was acquitted. The trial Court has observed that the cheque was not voluntarily signed APEAL.89-01 - 2 - by the accused. The trial Court has further observed that there was no seal of the bank to whom it was presented for encashment. The trial Court therefore, came to the conclusion that absence of seal of the bank and absence of date and signature of the concerned official of the bank who received the cheque, created a doubt about the presentation of cheque for encashment. The trial Court also came to the conclusion that the complainant had not established that the said cheque was given for for a legally enforcible debt and liability. 2. It is alleged in the complainant that the said cheque was given towards the liability for payment of Rs.30,000/-, which had arisen on account of purchase of grapes by the accused. The trial Court after perusing the certified copy of the 7-12 extract, filed on record, has noticed that the entries therein does not show that the grapes were sown. The trial Court by recording the cogent reasoning in the judgment, has acquitted the accused. It is not possible therefore, to re-appreciate the evidence and arrive at different conclusion in appeal against the acquittal of the accused. Hence, there is no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial Court. The criminal appeal is therefore, dismissed. [ V. M. KANADE J.]