MANOJ AGRAWAL Vs. SURYABHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 10.12.2010 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kota dismissing the Criminal Case No. 558 of 2010 for want of prosecution as a result of which respondents have been acquitted.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 07.09.2010 a complaint case was filed by the appellant/complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging in it that a cheque for Rs. 1,85,000 issued by the respon-dents has been dishonoured and therefore they have committed an offence. The said case was duly registered by the Court on 15.09.2010 and notices were directed to be issued to the respondents. The respondent No. 1 Suryabhan Singh appeared before the Court below on 20.10.2010 and was granted bail by the Court below. On 22.11.2010 the Court again issued notices to respondent No. 2 Manna Lal Yadav and the next date was given as 10.12.2010. On 10.12.2010 at 12.45 p.m. the case was taken up by the Court and on the said date the appellant, his counsel and respondent No. 2, Manna Lal Yadav were absent but respondent No. 1 Suryabhan Singh was the only person who was present in the Court. The learned trial Judge has dismissed the case for non-prosecution under section 256 of the Cr. P. C. and has acquitted the respondents. Hence, the present appeal.

(3.) Contention of Shri Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant is that on 10.12.2010, the case was listed for the presence of respondent No.2 Manna Lal Yadav and even if the appellant and his counsel were not present the Court below ought not to have dismissed the case under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It has been argued that the Court below has taken a very harsh view while dismissing the complaint case itself and therefore the impugned order may be set aside and the matter may be remanded back to the Court below.