NARAYAN SOLWANSHI Vs. KRISHNA KUMAR DEWANGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None appeared on behalf of the respondent despite notice had been served upon him, therefore, the case is heard finally.

(2.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Order dtd. 30/5/2018 passed by the learned First Additional Session Judge, Balod, District: Balod (C.G.) passed in Criminal Revision No. 28 of 2018 (Narayan Solwanshi v. Krishna Kumar Dewangan) wherein, the learned Revisional Court has upheld the order dtd. 14/3/2018 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balod, District: Balod (C.G.) whereby, the case filed by the petitioner under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 has been dismissed for want of prosecution. Hence this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner/complainant has filed a complaint case under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, against the respondent herein. It is submitted that when the case was listed on 14/3/2018 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balod, neither the complainant nor the counsel appointed by him was present therefore, the case was dismissed for want of prosecution. It is further submitted that after recording of evidence, the case was fixed for final argument. At the stage of final argument on 6/3/2017, the respondent had paid Rs.10,000.00 to the petitioner. When the case was fixed for compromise and when the respondent had not made his presence, arrest warrant was issued against the him on 29/11/2017. Learned counsel further submits that on 9/5/2018, the petitioner moved a revision against the order dtd. 14/3/2018, wherein, he has stated that he had informed his counsel about his ill health due to which he could not appear before the Trial Court. He had prayed in his revision that due to the mistake committed on the part of his counsel, his petition was dismissed, therefore, the matter be restored for hearing it on merits. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Revisional Court without considering the averments made in the application has dismissed the Criminal Revision on 30/5/2018, therefore, it is prayed by him that order dtd. 30/5/2018 be set aside and the Hon'ble Court may kindly restore the Criminal Case No. 6 of 2015.