Bombay High Court
Vinod S/O Deorao Nagrale vs P.R. Dhale @ P.R. Baudhha ,Aurangabad ... on 20 September, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:9452
Judgment 32-Cr.APPA-131-2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION [APPA] NO.131 OF 2025
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL [STAMP] NO. 1072 OF 2025
...
Vinod S/o Deorao Nagrale,
Aged about 47 years, Occ.- Service,
R/o Ambedkar Layout, Water Tank,
Gutkala Ward, Chandrapur-442402.
... APPLICANT
--VERSUS--
1] P.R. Dhale @ P.R. Baudhha,
President of Panchasshil Bahuddeshiy Sevabhavi Sanstha,
Address : Gat No. 404,
Behind Lokkuttar Buddha Vihhar, Ajantha Road,
Chowka Aurangabad,
Tal & Dist : Aurangabad.
2] Smt. Asha P. Dhale
Main Administrative the Buddhist International School,
Aurangaabad,
Address : Gat No. 404,
Behind Lokkuttar Buddha Vihhar, Ajantha Road,
Chowka Aurangabad,
Tal & Dist : Aurangabad.
... NON-APPLICANT
PIYUSH MAHAJAN
Judgment 32-Cr.APPA-131-2025
2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Anil A. Dhawas, Advocate for the applicant.
None for the non-applicants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 20, 2025.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Admit.
3. The present application is being filed seeking leave to
file appeal against the order of acquittal passed in Summary
Criminal Complaint No.830/2019 by the Judicial Magistrate,
First Class, Rajura, District Chandrapur, on 06/09/2024, by
which the complaint came to be dismissed for want of
prosecution, resulting into acquittal of the accused. Prayer in
the appeal is to quash and set aside of the said order and
restore the same to the original file.
4. Brief facts of the case are as under :
PIYUSH MAHAJAN
Judgment 32-Cr.APPA-131-2025
The non-applicants/accused are President and
Administrative Head of "Panchasshil Bahuddeshiy Sevabhavi
Sanstha, Aurangabad" which has started a School at
Chandrapur. The said school was required to be closed due to
shortage of students. There was an agreement in between the
applicant and non-applicants, and as per the said agreement,
the accused persons were to return an amount of Rs.3,50,000/-
to the applicant, if the school is required to be closed. The said
amount was deposited by the applicant with non-applicants
towards security. In lieu of that, the non-applicants issued a
cheque bearing No. 398200 drawn on State Bank of India,
Rajura Branch amounting to Rs.3,50,000/- towards the
repayment of the security deposit. This cheque was
dishonoured and despite service of statutory notice dated
25/10/2018, the non-applicants failed to repay the same,
therefore, the applicant / complainant initiated aforesaid
proceedings on 29/12/2018. Summons were issued to the
accused, but they did not appear.
PIYUSH MAHAJAN
Judgment 32-Cr.APPA-131-2025
5. It was contended on behalf of the applicant that, on
06/09/2024, due to the illness of the complainant's wife, he
could not remain present before the Court, as a result of which
the learned Trial Court dismissed the complaint under Section
256 Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 279 of BNSS) for want of
prosecution, which resulted into acquittal of the non-
applicants/accused. It is this order, which is subject matter of
challenge in this appeal.
6. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that
the absence was neither intentional nor wilful and seeks
restoration of the complaint for its adjudication on merits.
The learned Counsel has placed reliance on the judgment in
case of Shri Shaikh Akbar Talab VS Shri A.G. Pushpakaran &
Another, 2018 ALL MR (Cri) 1208, particularly paragraph
no.14, which are as follows:
" In all these cases cited (supra) the complaint was
dismissed under Section 256 of CrPC by the learned
PIYUSH MAHAJAN
Judgment 32-Cr.APPA-131-2025
Magistrate due to absence of the complainant. It is held that
principles of natural justice are required to be followed by
giving an opportunity to the complainant to prosecute the
complaint on merits as well as an opportunity is to be given
to the accused to contest the complaint on merits. Therefore,
the matters were restored by quashing and setting aside
the impugned orders."
7. This Court, by order dated 13/02/2025 issued notice
to the respondents/non-applicants. Despite service, the non-
applicants have chosen not to appear. Again on 10/09/2025
one opportunity was given to non-applicants. However, it was
made clear that if no one appears for non-applicants on
16/09/2025, the matter will be heard finally. Today also there
is no appearance on behalf of the non-applicants. Therefore,
considering the fact that the present proceeding pertains to the
year 2018, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
8. I have perused the order passed below Exh.1,
wherein, the learned Court below was pleased to dismiss the
PIYUSH MAHAJAN
Judgment 32-Cr.APPA-131-2025
complaint for want of prosecution, and the accused was
acquitted. It appears that the said order was passed under
Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I have also
examined the roznama produced by the applicant. Perusal of
the same shows that on several occasions, the applicant as well
as his counsel were present and on few occasions they were
absent. It is also noticed that on number of occasions accused
persons were absent. The roznama reflects that on
22/01/2024, 17/02/2024 and 16/03/2024 the Advocate for
applicant was present, however, on 22/04/2024, 20/06/2024
and 12/07/2024 the Applicant and his advocate were absent.
Further, it is important to note that the matter was in unready
category as warrant was issued against accused / respondent.
The matter was posted on 06/09/2024 on which date also
there was no appearance of applicant or his Advocate, as a
result of which the proceeding was dismissed for want of
prosecution and the accused persons were acquitted.
PIYUSH MAHAJAN
Judgment 32-Cr.APPA-131-2025
9. Considering the fact that the complaint was
dismissed for non-prosecution and the accused persons were
acquitted under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
in my opinion, the applicant has given sufficient explanation so
as to warrant interference in the order dated 06/09/2024. As it
is noted from the roznama that on certain occasions the
complainant was absent, on certain occasions he was present
along with his Advocate, and on some dates the Presiding
Officer was on leave. On the other hand, the accused were
absent throughout and warrant was issued against him, and
therefore, matter was in unready category. In this scenario the
trial Court ought to have adopted a liberal approach, as the
applicant was diligent in prosecuting the matter. Merely on few
occasions, if both were absent, that by itself would not be
sufficient to pass the order of dismissal for non-prosecution,
thereby acquitting the accused persons.
10. Considering the attending circumstances appearing
PIYUSH MAHAJAN
Judgment 32-Cr.APPA-131-2025
on record, it would be just and proper to afford a reasonable
opportunity to the applicant to pursue his cause on merits.
Therefore, I am inclined to grant leave to prefer the appeal.
11. It is necessary to mention at this juncture that the
learned Magistrate acquitted the accused under Section 256 of
the Cr.P.C. as both the applicant and his counsel were absent
on last three consequetive dates, which are noted above.
However, considering the reasons mentioned by the applicant
for his absence which is supported by medical certificate,
in my opinion is a sufficient explanation to interfere in the
order of dismissal for non-prosecution. It is also pertinent to
note that there is no opposition to the reasons which are
furnished by the applicant. The observations of this Court in the
case of Shri Shaikh Akbar Talab (supra), are relevant wherein it
is held that the principles of natural justice are required to be
followed by giving an opportunity to the complainant to
prosecute the complaint on merits, as well as, an opportunity is
PIYUSH MAHAJAN
Judgment 32-Cr.APPA-131-2025
to be given to the accused to contest the complaint on merits.
The principles of natural justice is the cardinal principle of law
and backbone of judicial process. Opportunity of hearing and
right to present the case are statutory incorporations of natural
justice by mandating procedural safeguards, and therefore, the
Court below ought not to have taken a harsh and hyper-
technical view by dismissing the complaint for want of
prosecution and accordingly violates procedural safeguards.
For the reasons state above, I deem it appropriate to allow the
prayer made by the applicant. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
(i) The Appeal is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order passed by the
Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Rajura,
District Chandrapur, in Summary Criminal
Complaint No.830/2019, dated 06/09/2024 is
hereby quashed and set aside.
PIYUSH MAHAJAN
Judgment 32-Cr.APPA-131-2025
(iii) Summary Criminal Case No. 830/2019, is
restored to file at its original stage.
(iv) The parties are directed to remain
present before the Learned Trial Court on
10/10/2025.
(v) The applicant shall proceed with the
matter without seeking any adjournment and shall
co-operate with the Trial Court. The Trial Court
may grant adjournment in exceptional
circumstances.
(vi) The above order is subject to payment of
cost of Rs.5,000/-. The cost shall be deposited by
the applicant in the Trial Court. The said cost shall
be paid to the respondent.
(vii) The appeal is disposed of, accordingly.
[ M. M. NERLIKAR, J ]
PIYUSH MAHAJAN
