GUNDAPA VIRBHADRAPPA KALYANI Vs. DNYANDEO SHANKARRAO JANGLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocates for respective parties.

(2.) This application is moved for grant of leave to prefer appeal against acquittal. Learned Advocate Shri Sakolkar submitted that the version of the complainant is consistent that he has advanced a loan of Rs. 2. 25 lakhs. The discrepancy is only about the date on which it was advanced. So that circumstance alone is not sufficient in rebuttal of presumption arising out under section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Advocate shri Bhumkar supports the judgment of acquittal stating that the complainant himself admitted that he has not advanced a loan as contended in the complaint as well as in his verification statement. He came with a case that this amount was advanced in presence of 2 witnesses but none of them were examined. So the trial Court was justified in recording finding that the cheques were not issued for any debt or legal liability.