RAJARAM NANDA Vs. VINAY RANJAN MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision is directed against order dated 12.10.2006 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mandla, in Criminal Case No. 772/2005, whereby the learned Magistrate had dismissed the application filed on behalf of revision petitioner/complainant for restoration of the private complaint which stood dismissed in default of appearance of the applicant and also for non -compliance with Court order to pay P.F., by order dated 22.07.2006. The facts giving rise to this criminal revision may briefly be stated thus:

(2.) SUBSEQUENTLY , the complainant moved an application for restoration of the complaint on the ground that he had duly engaged a counsel to appear on his behalf in the private complaint. On 22.07.2006 the complainant fell ill and therefore neither his counsel nor he appeared in the Court. As a result, the private complaint was dismissed by the Court as aforesaid. The presence of the complainant on that date was not required. It was further submitted that since the complainant did not deliberately remain absent on 22.7.2006, the private complaint be restored to its original number.

(3.) THE order dated 22.10.2006 has been assailed in this criminal revision on the grounds that dismissal of the private complaint for non -appearance of the complainant on just one date, was improper. Learned trial Court did not disbelieve the fact that the complainant was ill on the date on which he had failed to appear. It was further argued that on the aforesaid date, the case was fixed for appearance of the accused/respondent; as such, the personal appearance of the revision petitioner/complainant was not necessary.