BHANUJAN Vs. JAYABHANU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shorn of all details not necessary for this Criminal Miscellaneous Case, the question raised is whether a magistrate has jurisdiction to impose conditions while granting permission to an accused to appear through counsel dispensing with his personal appearance.

(2.) On a complaint filed by one Jayabhanu alleging that her husband, the petitioner herein, committed the offence of bigamy (S.494 of the Indian Penal Code), the magistrate took cognizance of the offence and issued process to him. As the petitioner is in a Gulf country, the complainant prayed for adopting steps for cancellation of his passport. At that stage a petition was filed by a counsel representing the petitioner praying for exempting him from personal appearance in court by permitting him to appear through counsel.

(3.) While dealing with his application, learned magistrate took into account another fact i.e., a sum of more than fifty thousand rupees is due from the petitioner to his wife and child as arrears of maintenance allowance fixed by the magistrate in earlier proceedings. There seems to be no dispute on that fact. So, the magistrate passed the order purportedly under S.205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code') allowing the petitioner to appear through counsel "if he is paying the outstanding liability...........amounting to Rs. 50,370/-..... to the complainant within 45 days and on executing a bond for his appearance as and when required by the court, with two solvent sureties each for Rs. 25,000/-". In this petition, petitioner contends that the magistrate has no jurisdiction to impose such conditions while passing an order under S.205 of the Code. So, he prays for deletion of such conditions.