6-ALP-101-2019.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 101 OF 2019 Ravi Kikan ….Applicant vs. White Clove Services Pvt. Ltd. … Respondents and Others Mr.Angsuman Ojha for the Applicant. Mr. Shailesh S. Ghag, APP for the State. CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 16th OCTOBER 2025 ORDER: 1. This application is filed under Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code by the original complainant to challenge the order passed by the learned magistrate acquitting respondent nos. 1 to 3 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the complainant was an employee of accused no. 1 – company and the cheques were issued in lieu of the financial remuneration as per the employment contract. He submits that 1/4 rrpillai RAJESHWARI RAMESH PILLAI Digitally signed by RAJESHWARI RAMESH PILLAI Date: 2025.10.27 23:54:50 +0200 6-ALP-101-2019.doc there is no dispute that the complainant was employed with accused no. 1 – company. The cheques were issued by the accused persons which were dishonoured and hence in view of the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act the accused persons were guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He submits that the learned magistrate has acquitted the accused on the ground that legally enforceable debt is not established and proof of service of demand notice is not satisfied. He points out that the online service report of the service was produced on record. Hence, there was no requirement to produce any further proof regarding service of demand notice. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant relies upon the decision of this court in the case of Sou. Usha @ Rashmi Ramesh Bhadre vs. Mr. Raviraj Yuvraj Chavan 1on the point of presumption of the legally enforceable liability. He also relies upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vishnoo Mittal vs. M/s. Shakti Trading Company2 1 Criminal Writ Petition No. 2979 of 2023 2 2025 SC 314 2/4 6-ALP-101-2019.doc 4. I have perused the papers of the application. The complainant claims to have received six cheques towards financial remuneration for his employment with accused no. 1 – company. The record shows that out of the six cheques, two cheques were drawn from the account of accused no. 1 company and the remaining four cheques were drawn from the account of PLAN C DENTAL LLP and PLAN DENTAL LLP. 5. Learned Magistrate has therefore held that the contents of the complaint as well as the affidavit of evidence is silent as to in what manner the four cheques issued by the two separate companies could be said to be towards legally enforceable liability of the accused persons, for maintaining the complaint for taking action under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The point argued regarding service of notice may not be necessary to be discussed further as the online service report is produced on record. 6. In view of these facts and the evidence on record claiming enforceability of the cheques issued by different companies towards liability of the accused company based on four cheques issued by two different companies, the view taken 3/4 6-ALP-101-2019.doc by the trial court for acquitting the accused persons is a possible view. 7. Considering the evidence on record, the view taken by the trial court is a plausible view that could have been taken based on the evidence on record. There can be interference in an appeal against acquittal if, after reappreciation of evidence, the only conclusion that could be drawn is that the guilt of the accused is proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In the present case, there is no ground for granting leave to file an appeal against the order of acquittal. 8. The application is therefore dismissed. (GAURI GODSE, J.) 4/4