SHANKARLAL BISANLAL KAMAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the respective parties. Rule. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith and the application is taken up for final hearing.

(2.) THIS is an application for leave to appeal by the original complainant against acquittal of the respondent no. 2 - original accused in S. T. c. No. 4500/99 by C. J. M. Jalna, vide order dated 3/1/2001.

(3.) WHILE relying upon the Ambiabai's case (supra), Shri Mantri has placed reliance on the contents in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the judgment. The Court has observed that under Section 256 of the Criminal Procedure Code, three courses are open in a case, where the complainant is absent on the date of hearing; i. e. (1) to acquit the accused, (2) to adjourn the case for future date or (3) dispense with the attendance of the complainant and proceed with the case. It was further observed that while maintaining the presumption of innocence of accused, the Court should not be harsh towards complainant. The circumstances in which the observations were made are available in paragraph no. 6, which can usefully be quoted: