ROHIT HOODA Vs. S. R. INFOTECH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dtd. 26/7/2025 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Manali, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, whereby complaint No.169/2018, titled Rohit Hooda Vs. M/s S.R. Infotech, came to be dismissed in default, appellant- complainant has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Sec. 419 of the BNSS, 2023, praying therein to set aside the aforesaid order and restore the complaint filed under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) Learned counsel representing the appellant fairly states that on account of some unavoidable circumstances, appellant/complainant was unable to come present on the date of passing of the impugned order and he was under impression that his counsel will come present and seek further time, however, Court below, taking note of his absence, dismissed the complaint for non-appearance and non-prosecution.

(3.) To the contrary, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents-accused, supported the impugned order. He submitted that since complainant had not come present to pursue his complaint, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the Court below, while passing impugned order. He submitted that in criminal proceedings complainant and accused, unless exempted, are always under obligation to put in appearance on each and every date.