Gopichand Lahau Bharati vs The State Of Maharashtra
2016 Latest Caselaw 1064 Bom

                                                                      912.APEAL.219.16.doc


             
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                 
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                            CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 219 OF 2016




                                                         
    Gopichand Lahau Bharati
    Age: 69 years, Occu.: Agri.,
    R/o Village Takali, Tq. Kaij,




                                                        
    Dist. Beed.                                                 ..APPELLANT

                     VERSUS

    1. State of Maharashtra




                                                  
        Through Police Station, Kaij
       . Kaij, Dist. Beed.           
    2. Navnath Tukaram Chavan
       Age: 52 years, Occu.: Mukadam/
                                    
       Labour contractor of Sugar Factory,
       Ranjani Tq. Kallam, Dist. Osmanabad,
       R/o Ghonasi Tq. Ghnsangwi, Dist. Jalna                   ..RESPONDENTS

                                      ....
          

    Mr. B.A. Dhengle and Mr. S.A. Dhengle, Advocates for applicant.
    Mrs. R.K. Ladda, APP for Respondent No.1.10.APPLN.5827.15.doc
       



    Mr. K.N. Shaikh, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
                                      ....

                                           CORAM : INDIRA K. JAIN, J.





                                           DATED : 31st MARCH, 2016

    ORAL JUDGMENT :





    .                This appeal takes an exception to the order dated 10.04.2015

    passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kaij in S.C.C. No.

    133/2008.




    S.S.DESHPANDE                           1   /  3




            ::: Uploaded on - 05/04/2016                 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 11:16:44 :::
                                                                           912.APEAL.219.16.doc


    2.              Heard Mr. Dhengle, Advocates for applicant, Mrs. Ladda, APP




                                                                                     
    for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Shaikh, Advocate for Respondent No.2.




                                                             
    3.              Applicant is the original complainant in SCC No. 133/2008 filed

    against Respondent No.2 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of




                                                            
    the Negotiable Instruments Act. On 10.04.2015 matter was taken up on

    board by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kaij in special drive as




                                                 
    per the direction of the High Court. Since complainant was not present, it
                                     
    was observed by learned Magistrate that he was not interested in

    proceeding with the matter and dismissed the complaint under Section
                                    
    256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
           

    4.              Perused copy of Rojnama.          It shows that complainant was
        



    present earlier on many occasions before the Court. The observations of

    the learned Magistrate that since filing of complaint, complainant neither





    appeared before the Court nor took any step are thus against the record.

    Impugned order indicates that no notice of special drive was given to

    complainant.





    5.              In this background questioned order would not sustain. Even

    otherwise to avoid denial of justice appeal deserves to be allowed.

    Hence the following order:


    S.S.DESHPANDE                          2   /  3




            ::: Uploaded on - 05/04/2016                     ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 11:16:44 :::
                                                                             912.APEAL.219.16.doc


                                           ORDER

I) Criminal Appeal No. 219 of 2016 is allowed.

II) Impugned order dated 10.04.2015 passed by

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kaij in

S.C.C. No. 133/2008 is quashed and set aside and

matter is remitted back to the Trial Court for its

disposal in accordance with the law.

                    III)          No order as to costs.
          

                                                          (INDIRA K. JAIN, J.)
       






    S.S.DESHPANDE                             3   /  3