ARCHIBALD QUADROS Vs. LAXMAN SHETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed a private complaint, under Section 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 r/w. Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act'), against the respondent, on 26.7.2013, in the Court of Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C at Kundapura. On 07.9.2013, the sworn statement was recorded. Exs.C-1 to C-5 were marked on 21.09.2013. Criminal case against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act was registered on 17.1.2014 and process was issued to the accused. Upon appearance, on 12.6.2014, the accused was enlarged on bail.

(2.) This petition was filed on 10.11.2014, invoking Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to direct J.M.F.C., at Kundapura, to retain C.C.No.162/2014 on his file, on the ground that the petitioner suffers from various ailments and that the doctor advised him not to travel or undergo stress and that he finds extremely difficult to go to Mysore, which is at a distance of about 300 kms.

(3.) Mr. Dilraj Rohit Sequeira, learned advocate, contended that, if the case against the respondent, in C.C.No.162/2014, on the file of Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C, Kundapura is not ordered to be retained, the petitioner would suffer severe hardship. He submitted that the respondent, a practicing Dentist and having good health, would not suffer any inconvenience or prejudice, by retaining of the case in the Court at Kundapura. He submitted that the respondent has availed the services of an advocate at Kundapura and that the advocate will be appearing for the purpose of recording plea etc., and it is only for the purpose of defence evidence, if any, the respondent's presence would be required and that the petitioner is ready to bear the travel cost of the respondent from Mysore. Learned counsel submitted that in order to do real and substantial justice, C.C.No.162/2014 be directed to be retained for trial and decision by the J.M.F.C at Kundapura.