K NAZIMUDDIN Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal, under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., is filed by the appellant/complainant, challenging the docket order, dated 19.01.2017, passed in C.C.No.343 of 2014 by the XVI Additional Judge-cum-XX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, whereby, the complaint filed by the appellant/complainant was dismissed for default, for non appearance of the complainant, and the respondents 2 to 4 herein/accused were acquitted under Section 256(1) of Cr.P.C., for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 427, 506, 354 read with 34 of IPC.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/complainant and perused the record. There is no representation for the respondents 2 to 4 herein/accused.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant/complainant would submit that due to wrong noting of dates of adjournments by the counsel for the appellant/complainant, the appellant/complainant could not appear before the Court below. The appellant/complainant is ready to proceed with the case. The Court below ought not to have dismissed the complaint of the appellant/complainant for default for his non-appearance and ultimately prayed to allow the appeal by setting aside the docket order under challenge and restore the complaint to file. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel had relied on a decision of the Apex Court in Associated Cement Companies Limited Vs. Keshvanand, 1997 LawSuit(SC) 1592