T K SADANANDAN Vs. RAMAKRISHNAN T K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the complainant in C.C. No. 169 of 2000 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -V, Kozhikode against the order of acquittal of the first respondent herein under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. dt.7.11.2002. That was a case filed by the complainant against the first respondent herein alleging commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, involving a cheque for Rs.75,000/- On 7.11.2002, the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 256(1) Cr.P.C. due to the absence of the complainant and his counsel.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) SINCE the presence of the complainant was not required on 7.11.2002 as non-bailable warrant was pending against the accused, the learned Magistrate is not justified in acquitting the accused for the absence of the complainant and his counsel. In the above circumstances, in the interest of justice that order of acquittal has to be set aside.