Sarita Jalan vs Suresh Kumar Santwal

Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J

This Acquittal Appeal has been preferred under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C invoking the power under Section 256 Cr.P.C as on the date of hearing, the Appellant/Complainant has not made his appearance, therefore, for want of prosecution, complaint case No.2773/2018 was closed on 16.0.3.2020 and the Respondent/accused was acquitted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur.

Shri Agrawal submits that the complaint case was preferred under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the Respondent/accused. He further submits that the complaint case has been filed in the year 2018 and the Appellant/Complainant has been regularly appearing before the trial Court, however, due to Covid-19 pandemic situation, he could not appear on the said date and for certain bona fide reasons, he could not appear on 29.02.2020 also. He further submits that however the trial Court has, on the date of hearing i.e. 16.03.2020, in spite of notification being issued for Covid-19 pandemic situation, dismissed the complaint case and acquitted the Respondent/accused, therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable and prays to allow the Appeal by restoring the original complaint case and remanding the matter back to the concerned Court to be decided on merits.

On the other side, Shri Deshmukh does not dispute that Covid-19 pandemic has started by the date of hearing i.e. 16.03.2020 and it is not a case of singular default as he has not appeared on 29.02.2020 also, therefore, the impugned order is just and proper and prays to dismiss the Appeal.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the Appeal carefully.

Undisputedly, the complaint case was dismissed during the period of Covid-19 pandemic but as on the earlier date i.e. on 29.02.2020, the Court has adjourned the matter for 16.03.2020, therefore, considering the fact that covid-19 pandemic has already commenced by the said date, the concerned Court ought to have adopted liberal approach and as such, the discretion exercised by the said Court is not sustainable. Accordingly, the order impugned is set aside.

The complaint of the Complainant/Appellant is directed to be restored to its original number and the trial Court is directed to proceed with the matter further from the last stage of hearing, in accordance with law.

Both the parties are directed to appear before the concerned Court on 11th June 2025. The Complainant may also take necessary steps to advance his case in accordance with law.

In the result, the Acquittal Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.

Record be sent back to the concerned trial Court with a copy of this judgment.