Heard. Rule. By consent rule made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service.

1] This criminal writ petition has been placed before me as it seeks to question the order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 12th Court in C.C.No.585/SS/08.

2] By the order dated 21st January 2011, a copy of which is at page 69 of the paper-book, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate has allowed the application filed by the accused Nos. 1 to 3 and discharged them of the offences punishable under section 138 read with 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

3] Mr.Mundargi, learned Counsel appearing for the original complainant – petitioner before me submitted that the trial court has misconstrued and misapplied the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Kusum Ingots Vs. Pennar Peterson Securities Ltd. & Ors. reported in (2000) 2 S.C.C. 745. He submits that the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of M/s.Aefloat Textiles (India) Ltd. & Anr. Vs. M/s.Boghara Polyfab Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2008 Cr.L.J. 1494 has held that mere passing of an order by Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) under section 22 of the Sick Industries (Spec