PURUSHOTTAM MISHRILAL BHUTARA Vs. JUGALKISHORE R KOTHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three criminal writ petitions involve a common question of law, and can be therefore disposed of by this common judgment and order.

(2.) THE petitioners in all these three petitions are the same, who are the original accused before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ichalkaranji. Respondent No. 1 Jugalkishore Kothari/original complainant in all these writ petitions is also the same.

(3.) THE complainant Jugalkishore filed three private complaints in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Ichalkaranji under sections 403, 406, 420 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the present petitioners. These were separate complaints which came to be numbered as Criminal Case No. 93/90, Criminal Case No. 91/92 and Criminal Case No. 92/90 respectively. The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class issued the process against the accused. The petitioners are the residents of Pali (Marvar) and it took considerable time to serve the summons upon the accused. In fact, since summons could not be served, bailable warrants and thereafter, non-bailable warrants also came to be issued against the accused. Thereafter, accused appeared and applied for cancellation of non-bailable warrant issued against them. Considerable time was thus lost in just securing the presence of the accused/petitioners. Thereafter, it seems that the Judicial Magistrate, First Class himself was absent, as he was sent for training. This was in the year 1988. Then the accused made application praying for exemption from appearance under section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which came to be granted. This was in the year 1989. Thereafter, on 7th February, 1990, the complainant was absent. When the complainant was absent, his complaints came to be dismissed for default on 7th February, 1990 for want of prosecution, and the accused came to be discharged.