Arvind Singh Chandel, J
1. The instant appeal has been preferred against the order dated 12.10.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur in Criminal
Complaint Case No.1338 of 2017, whereby the Trial Court has acquitted the Respondent of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act as the case was dismissed for want of prosecution.
2. It appears from the order-sheet of the Trial Court that the Appellant/Complainant was not present before the Court on the date of hearing, i.e.,
12.10.2018. From the order-sheet, it also reveals that on that date particulars of the offence were to be explained to the Respondent/accused.
Therefore, on that date, personal appearance of the Appellant/Complainant was not required. Despite that, the Judicial Magistrate First Class has
dismissed the complaint case for want of prosecution.
3. Dismissal of the complaint case was not the only option before the Trial Court. The Trial Court could have adjourned the case to some other date
as per the provisions of Section 256(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Apart from this, from the order-sheet of the Trial Court, it reveals that the
date on which the complaint case was dismissed was the date fixed for explaining the particulars of the offence to the Respondent/accused.
Therefore, on that date, personal appearance of the Appellant/Complainant was not required. Hence, the impugned order dated 12.10.2018 is not
sustainable.
4. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 12.10.2018 passed by the Trial Court is set aside. The matter is remanded to the
Trial Court. The Trial Court is directed to proceed with the case and decide the issues on merit in accordance with law after securing presence of
both the parties. Both the parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 22.10.2019 for further proceedings.
5. Record of the Court below be sent back along with a copy of this judgment forthwith for information and necessary compliance.
