This appeal challenges an order dismissing a complaint due to the complainant's absence. The High Court set aside the impugned order as the delay was only ten minutes, allowing parties to appear before the trial court for a new hearing.
Impugned order dated 29.3.1994 set aside. Appeal allowed. Parties directed to appear before trial court on 08.01.2018.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 85 / 1995
Shadi Lal Jain
----Appellant
Versus
Shyam
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. N.A. Naqvi, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. C.P. Meena
For Respondent(s) : Dr. P.C. Jain
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Judgment
04/12/2017
Present appeal has been filed to assail the order dated 29.3.1994 passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.2, Alwar whereby the complaint filed by the appellant for prosecution of accused-respondent for offences under Sections 447, 448 IPC was dismissed due to absence of the complainant and his counsel.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned order dated 29.3.1994 specifically state that the complainant was called till 11.50 AM and due to his absence, complaint was dismissed by taking recourse to Section 256(1) Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that it was incumbent for the trial court to call the matter till the court time is over. It is contended that in the present case, application was
(2 of 2)
[CRLA-85/1995]
immediately filed at 12.00 PM for recalling the impugned order and for recording presence of the appellant-complainant.
Be that as it may, the trial court ought to have posted the matter after lunch to enable the complainant or his counsel to appear in the court. Since before lunch application was filed and there was delay of ten minutes only in appearance of the complainant, in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 29.3.1994 is set aside. The present appeal is allowed. Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the trial court on 08.01.2018.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)J.
Govind/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned order dismissing the complaint due to absence of the complainant should be set aside given the minimal delay of ten minutes.
Shadi Lal Jain
Shyam
Kanwalsingh Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
