B LAKSHMAIAH Vs. VEERAMALLI NAGESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant in C.C. No.239 of 1994 on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, is the appellant herein. The 1st respondent herein (referred as respondent hereinafter) is the accused in the said case.

(2.) The facts in brief resulting in filing of this appeal are as under:The appellant-complainant filed a private complaint for the offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. On 13-5-1996, the accused was present and the complainant was absent. He was absent till 4 p.m. on that day and there was no representation on behalf of the complainant. His Counsel was also absent. Under those circumstances, the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 256 Cr.P.C. Aggrieved by that Order, the complainant preferred the revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. to the Court of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad and the same was taken on the file as Criminal Revision Petition No.77 of 1996. The learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge by his order dated 20-11-1996 dismissed the said revision petition. The learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge disbelieved the version of the complainant mat he was not in a position to attend the Court on 13-5-1996 as he was suffering with Bronchitis and diabetes and the learned Judge also disbelieved the medical certificate dated 12-5-1996 produced to that effect. Thereafter the complainant has filed this appeal together with Crl.M.P. No.816 of 1997 seeking special leave of this Court to prefer an appeal against the order of acquittal of the respondent-accused by the order dated 13-5-1996 made in C.C. No.239 of 1994 which was confirmed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad by order dated 20-11-1996 made in Crl. Revision Petition No.77 of 1996. This Court granted special leave sought for by the order dated 18-8-1997. On the same day, the appeal was also admitted as Criminal Appeal No.833 of 1997.

(3.) As seen from the Memorandum of Appeal, the appellant-complainantherein prays this Court "to allow the appeal setting aside the order dated 20-11-1996 made in Criminal Revision Petition No.77 of 1996 by the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad". In effect, the complainant has preferred this appeal to set aside the order of the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, passed in Criminal Revision Petition No.77 of 1996 confirming the order of acquittal passed in C.C. No.239 of 1994,