the learned magistrate wrote that the complainant was absent and not represented. It is clear that the complainant was absent on that day, but not clear whether she was represented or not on that day. The learned counsel for the appellant produced the certified copy of the order-sheet in ST 2179/2017. There were only two postings for evidence after it was reported that the mediation failed. Going by the order sheet, on 26.1.2019 the complainant was absent, but represented. Going by the proceedings on 16.2.2019, the complainant was absent and represented, but stated immediately below that the complainant was absent and not represented. It is not clear whether the complainant was represented or not from the proceedings and the order of the learned magistrate. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that during that time the husband of the appellant was bedridden owing to cancer and that he died later. I do not see any reason whatsoever to reject the submission. It appears to me that it was a fit case to grant at least one more opportunity to the appellant to adduce evidence. In this view of the matter, I allow the appeal and set aside the order under appeal.
