L P SUBRAMANIAN Vs. S K RANGANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE criminal appeal arises out of the judgment of acquittal dated 16.12.2010 made in C.C.No.3228 of 2005 on the file of the XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant herein as a complainant preferred a private complaint against the respondent/accused under Sections 405, 409 and 420 IPC, which was taken on file on 13.04.2005. In the trial Court, almost 70 hearings were over and the complainant was present in 55 hearings and chief-examination of P.W.1 and P.W.2 has also been completed. On the particular hearing date (i.e.) on 16.12.2010, complainant/appellant herein was not present. Therefore, the learned Magistrate invoking Section 256 Cr.P.C. dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused/respondent. He further submitted that he is ready to prosecute the case within the stipulated time granted by this Court and hence, he prayed for allowing of this appeal.

(3.) ON perusal of record, it is seen that the appellant herein as a complainant preferred a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the Metropolitan Magistrate's Court took cognizable offence under Section 409 Cr.P.C., which was forwarded to the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Egmore, Chennai-8, for necessary action. He registered a case in Crime No.491/2002 under Section 409 IPC and took up investigation. After enquiry, final report received by police referring the case is of civil in nature. Then the appellant herein filed protest application, which was taken on file as C.M.P.No.740 of 2005. After hearing both sides, the learned Magistrate took the complaint on file under Section 409 IPC against the accused on 13.04.2005.