SANGEETA ATUL SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is filed by the appellant - original complainant under Sec. 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short"Cr.P.C.") against the judgment and order of acquittal dtd. 31/03/2023 passed by the learned 37 th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as"the trial court") in Criminal Case No.17255 of 2021, whereby, the learned Trial Judge has acquitted the original accused respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short"the N.I. Act").

(2.) Heard learned advocate Mr.Krunal G. Patel, appearing on behalf of the appellant - original complainant, learned APP Mr.Yuvraj Brahmbhatt, appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 - State of Gujarat and learned advocate Mr.P.P. Majmudar, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 and 3 - original accused.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr.Patel has submitted that neither the appellant nor the advocate engaged to represent her case, could remain present before the trial court at the time of hearing of the criminal case and in their absence the trial court has passed the impugned order of dismissed for default rejecting the complaint of the present appellant. He has submitted that the trial court has recorded that from 26/05/2022 to 31/03/2023, the matter was kept pending for cross-examination of the complainant. He has further submitted that the appellant is residing in Abu Dhabi alongwith her husband and therefore, it was not possible for the appellant to remain present at that time. He has submitted that the appellant and her advocate were under banofide impression that the proceedings before the trial court itself had been stayed by this Court vide order dtd. 18/01/2022 passed by this Court is Special Criminal Application (For Quashing) No.408 of 2022 and therefore, the appellant could not appear before the trial court for further proceedings either by herself or through the counsel and therefore, he has urged that the present appeal be allowed and the impugned order passed by the trial court be quashed and set aside.