Ratul Lahkar vs Mrinal Ch. Das
2022 Latest Caselaw 3463 Gua

                                                                    Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010056972017




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                 Case No. : Crl.L.P./123/2017

            RATUL LAHKAR
            S/O S.R. LAHKAR, R/O GOTANAGAR, PO-GOTANAGAR, PS- JALUKBARI,
            GUWAHATI-781033



            VERSUS

            MRINAL CH. DAS
            S/O SRI SIRISH CHANDRA DAS, R/O BSNL QUARTER COMPLEX, N.E.
            REGION, DHARAPUR, PO and PS AZARA, GUWAHATI-781017



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MS.P UPAMANYU

Advocate for the Respondent :




             Linked Case :

            RATUL LAHKAR



             VERSUS

            MRINAL CHANDRA DAS
                                                                       Page No.# 2/3

           ------------
           Advocate for : MS.P UPAMANYU
           Advocate for : appearing for MRINAL CHANDRA DAS



                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

                                      ORDER

Date : 09-09-2022

Heard Mr. B. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner.

This application under Section 378[4], Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been preferred seeking Special Leave to Appeal against a judgment and order dated 23.06.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No. 4, FTC, Kamrup [M], Guwahati ['the appellate court', for short] in Criminal Appeal no. 139/2016 whereby the appellate court has set aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kamrup [M], Guwahati ['the trial court', for short] in C.R. Case no.

1075C/2014. The learned trial court had convicted the opposite party no. 2 for commission of the offence under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for 4 months and to pay compensation of Rs. 4,80,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for 1 [one] month.

It is noticed from the case records that the applicant has not taken steps by usual process or through the Officer In-charge of the concerned Police Station for service of notice on the sole respondent in terms of the order of the Court dated 04.05.2019 till date. It goes to show that the applicant has not taken steps for service of notice upon the sole respondent for a period of more than 3 years.

Page No.# 3/3

Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he has not received any instruction from the applicant during the last 3 years since 2019 as regards the address of the opposite party no. 2. It, thus, appears from the case records as well as from the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not serious in pursuing the present litigation since no attempt has been made to serve the notice upon the opposite party no. 2 for a period of more than 3 years.

In view of the above fact situation, this Court having no other option, is constrained to dismiss this application on the ground of non-prosecution.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant