DOSHI DEVELOPERS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned advocate for the petitioners i.e. original accused in C.C.No. 1557/S/2022 (originally numbered as CC No.1307/S/2000). Heard the learned advocate for the Respondent No.1-original complainant. The said complaint was filed in the 37th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai against the petitioners for an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) BY order dated 11.9.2003, the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint as the complainant was absent. On the very next day, the complainant made an application for restoration of the case. He stated therein that on account of his ill-health, he could not remain present in the Court. On hearing both the sides, the learned Magistrate allowed the application and restored the complaint i.e. C.C.No.1557/S/2000 on file.

(3.) THE Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Azeem Vs. A. Vankatesh and Anr. [2003 ALL MR (Cri) 400](S.C.)] has held that if the complaint has been dismissed for non-appearance of the complainant, the complaint ought to be restored on file on sufficient cause being shown. Mr.Marwadi, has submitted that in the case of Mohammed Azeem, the complainant had remained absent only on a single date and hence, the complaint came to be restored. However, in the present case, the complainant remained absent on four occasions and in such circumstances, the learned Magistrate had rightly dismissed the complaint.