OM GAYATRI AND CO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule, made returnable forthwith by consent of parties.

(2.) The petitioners have impugned order dated 20. 6.2003 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded in Criminal Revision no. 24/2002, allowing the revision and setting aside the order dated 14.1.2000 passed by chief Judicial Magistrate dismissing the complaint in S. C. C. No. 1150/ 1997.

(3.) The facts, relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition are that: Respondent no. 2 is engaged in a wholesale business of selling Dal to the customers on credit basis. Petitioner was a regular customer. For the purpose of clearing the dues, the petitioner issued cheque No. 495330 drawn on Punjab national Bank, Nanded on 25.4.1997 for Rs. 21. 010/ -. The cheque was deposited by Respondent no. 2 in Peoples Cooperative Bank, hingoli on 25.4.1997. He was however, informed that the cheque was dishonoured. Therefore, notice as required by proviso (b) to section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, was served but as payment was not made, respondent no. 2 filed a complaint in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nanded on 20. 6.1997 against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1888 (hereinafter to be referred to as N. I. Act). Plea of the petitioner was recorded on 15.11.1999 and the matter was adjourned for recording of evidence to 24.11.1999. It was further adjourned for the same purpose to 6.12.1999 and then to 24.1.2000. On that day, respondent no. 2 remained absent. Learned magistrate waited upto 5. 00 p. m. However, as respondent no. 2 did not appear before the court, he came to the conclusion that Respondent no. 2 is avoiding to adduce evidence. Therefore, by referring to judgment of this Court, reported in 1998 Mah LJ 576 : (1998 Cri LJ 3754) learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint and acquitted the petitioner.