LODBA YADEO BHAKARE Vs. SANJAY BHURMAL DODWADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application is filed by applicant under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging order dated 28.11.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Washim in Criminal Revision No.115/2006 thereby confirming order dated 31.10.2006 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Washim in Misc. Criminal Case No.39/2006. Brief facts of the case are as under.

(2.) THE applicant herein had purchased a Tractor for Rs.3,98,000/- and the same was financed by ICICI Bank. Marginal amount of Rs.1,18,000/- was paid to the applicant by the Bank. The non applicant alleged that the applicant had taken hand loan of Rs.96,000/- to pay the marginal amount.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the applicant submitted that on 07.06.2005, cheque was issued at Washim, on 30.11.2005, cheque was presented on 30.12.2005, cheque came to be dishonoured, on 19.01.2006, notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act came to be issued. Therefore, according to learned counsel, period of limitation starts from the first notice. On 20.02.2006, the complainant registered complaint with Post Office. On 14.03.2006, there was reply by the Post Office that notice was delivered to the applicant on 28.01.2006. It is further the contention of learned counsel for the applicant that nothing has been brought on record by the complainant as to what happened to the notice which was sent Under Postal Certificate to the applicant. According to the learned counsel, the period of limitation expired on 14.03.2006. The complaint is filed on 22.03.2006. The application for condonation of delay was also filed on the same day. However, there is no explanation for the period from 14.03.2006 to 22.03.2006. The delay has not properly been explained in the application. No reasons are given whatsoever while allowing the application for delay by the Courts below. Learned counsel, therefore, submitted that no sufficient cause has been shown in the application and more particularly there is no any explanation for the period from 14.03.2006 to 22.03.2006. Therefore, learned counsel submitted that this application may be allowed. Learned counsel, in support of his contention relied upon judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajit Singh Thakur Singh and another vs. State of Gujarat; AIR 1981 Supreme Court 733. Learned counsel on the basis of the said pronouncement, submitted that the cause shown in the application cannot be said to be sufficient cause since the non applicant allowed the limitation to expire and then filed application for condonation of delay along with complaint.