P. ANANDA RAO Vs. R. KRISHORE PATANAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. is at the behest of the petitioner questioning the correctness and judicial propriety of the impugned order dtd. 24/11/2012 passed in Criminal Revision Petition No.20 of 2012 by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur, Ganjam, whereby, order dtd. 9/8/2010 in 1CC Case No.132 of 2007 of the learned J.M.F.C., Berhampur was set aside and such challenge is on the grounds inter alia that the same is untenable in law and therefore, deserves to be interfered with and set aside.

(2.) The complaint in 1CC Case No.132 of 2007 was filed by the opposite party under Sec. 138 NI Act, wherein, the petitioner entered appearance, however, when it was posted to 9/8/2010 for hearing, the former did not turn up, as a result of which, the complaint was dismissed and the latter was acquitted under Sec. 256 Cr.P.C. and the case was closed by the learned J.M.F.C., Berhampur. Against the above order of acquittal, the opposite party preferred a revision which was allowed by the impugned order under Annexure-2 restoring the complaint to file. The aforesaid decision of the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur, Ganjam is under challenge which is primarily on the ground that the revision was not maintainable as the order of acquittal under Sec. 256 Cr.P.C. was to be appealed in terms of Sec. 378 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Heard Mr. Amitav Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jugal Kishore Panda, learned counsel for the opposite party.