DHARAMPAL SHAKARAPPA CHAWALE Vs. VIMAL ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is filed against the Judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Udgir, dated 9th April, 2009, allowing the appeal filed under Section 86 of Code of Criminal Procedure and setting aside attachment and sale of certain property belonging to the respondent No. 2.

(2.) The respondent No. 2 is a proprietor of respondent No. 1. Both of them are accused in Criminal Case No. 1690 of 2004, which was filed by the respondent No. 5. It was a case under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The case was filed in 2004. Admittedly, the respondent No. 2, after his release on bail in the case, remained absent and the non-bailable-warrants were issued against him repeatedly. Ultimately, on 1st February, 2006, a notice to his surety was given. The surety appeared before the Court and sought time to produce respondent No. 2. On 1st March, 2006, at the request of the respondent No. 5/the complainant, the learned Magistrate ordered to issue proclamation under Section 82 of Code of Criminal Procedure against the respondent No. 2.

(3.) It appears from the record that the proclamation was published in a newspaper on 24th May, 2006. The record however does not show the original proclamation. The record also shows that after order for issuance of proclamation, mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 82 of Code of Criminal Procedure was not followed. Section 82 of Code of Criminal Procedure reads as under: