9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 521 - HC - Indian LawsDismissal of complaint - invocation of Section 204(4) of Cr.P.C. - failure to pay the process - HELD THAT - A perusal of the impugned order dated 25.04.2018 reveals that the provision under Section 204(4) of Cr.P.C. is not complied with. The said provision says that if any fees are not paid within a reasonable time, the complaint may be dismissed In the instant case, the learned Magistrate has not mentioned anything in his order as to when the NBW was issued and when the fee was ordered to be paid. Therefore, the impugned order is cryptic and do not reflect compliance of the provision under Section 204(4) Cr.P.C. - On the other hand, the complainant has already been examined and his evidence as PW.1 was recorded and he was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the Accused. Therefore, the only course left open for the trial Court was to consider the evidence of respondent No.1/Accused as nil and pass orders basing on the evidence available on record. This Criminal Appeal is allowed setting aside the impugned judgment.
Issues involved:
Dismissal of complaint under Section 256 Cr.P.C. and Section 204(4) Cr.P.C. without proper compliance. Analysis: The appellant, who is the complainant, filed a complaint under Sections 190 and 200 of Cr.P.C. against the accused for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The trial court dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused as the complainant was absent, had no representation, and failed to pay the process for service of Nonbailable Warrant against the accused. The appellant appealed against this decision. The appellant's counsel argued that the trial court should have disposed of the case on merits instead of dismissing it. The trial court's action was based on Section 256 Cr.P.C., which allows for the acquittal of the accused if the complainant is absent unless the court decides to adjourn the hearing. Additionally, the trial court invoked Section 204(4) of Cr.P.C., which states that if process fees are not paid within a reasonable time, the complaint may be dismissed. The impugned order dated 25.04.2018 revealed that the provision under Section 204(4) of Cr.P.C. was not complied with as the magistrate did not specify when the process fee was ordered to be paid. The order lacked clarity and did not reflect compliance with the legal provision. Despite the complainant's examination and recording of evidence, the trial court dismissed the complaint without considering the available evidence on record. The trial court's failure to follow the correct procedure and provide details about the process fee in the order rendered it liable to be set aside. The High Court allowed the Criminal Appeal, setting aside the impugned judgment and directing the trial court to dispose of the matter on merits. The appellant was instructed to deposit the process fee for the issuance of process as per Section 204 Cr.P.C. Any pending miscellaneous petitions were to be closed as a result of this decision.
|
