NARENDRA SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Narendra Singh, is aggrieved by the order dated 20.02.2012 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, No.12, Jaipur Metropolitan City, Jaipur, whereby the learned Magistrate has rejected the petitioner's application under Sec. 70 (2) Cr.P.C.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that in 2003, a complaint was filed against him, and his father for offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act [the Act, for short]. He continued to attend the trial till 07.12.2004. However, in the year, 2004, he lost his father, and shifted to his Village. During this time with regard to a complaint made to the Registrar [Vigilance] of this Court, the record was summoned by the Registrar. Subsequently, the record was returned on 18.10.2004. The petitioner further claims that for all these years from 2004 to 2012, he was working in his Village; he had no information that the trial was continuing. It is only subsequently that the standing warrant of arrest has been issued against him by the trial court. Immediately, he rushed to the trial Court, and filed an application under Sec. 70 (2) Crimial P.C. However, by order dated 20.02.2012, the learned Magistrate has dismissed the application. Hence, this petition before this Court.

(3.) Mr. Mukesh Kumar Goyal, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently contended that the entire complaint is misplaced. For, the cheque, in dispute, was issued by his father. However, the Court has taken cognizance against both him and his father. Meanwhile, the father has expired. Secondly, since the petitioner had no information that a warrant of arrest had been issued against him, he failed to appear before the trial Court. The moment, he came to know about the same, he filed the application.