ANIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complaint filed by him has been dismissed by the learned Magistrate under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The impugned order reads thus:

(2.) The above complaint was filed on August 27, 2001. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the sworn statement of the complainant was not recorded by the court below. The case was in fact called in open court only on three occasions before it was ultimately dismissed on December 23, 2003. It was being adjourned from time to time by publishing notification on the notice board of the court without being called in open court. On a perusal of the lower court proceedings, the above submission appears to be correct. The following are the proceedings of the court below:

(3.) Therefore, the order of the learned Magistrate is set aside. The learned Magistrate shall restore the complaint back to file and dispose of the same in accordance with law, after affording sufficient opportunity to the complainant to prosecute his case. The petitioner shall appear before the court below on July 7, 2005.