9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 381X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deavour which was to be made by the National Lok Adalat was to have the matter compromised or settled between the parties. But, of course, the compromise could have been arrived at between the parties, if there was meeting of minds - A compromise or settlement cannot be forced upon the parties. In other words, in case one of the parties does not appears before the Lok Adalat where their case stands referred for compromise or settlement, the only inference which can be prudently drawn is that the party is not interested in having the matter compromised. That being the situation, the Lok Adalat has to thereafter proceed by ordering that as the matter could not be settled between the parties, the same is referred back to the court from which it was sent for the purpose of compromise or settlement. However, by no stretch of imagination, the Lok Adalat can confer upon itself the powers of a regular criminal Court and proceed as per the provisions of Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as has been done in the present case by the Lok Adalat. The provisions of Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be exercised by the Lok Adalat. Not only this, the 1987 Act d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d had got a vehicle financed from the appellant/complainant vide loan agreement dated 20.05.2011 and a cheque amounting to ₹ 3.00 Lac in this regard was drawn by the respondent/accused in favour of the appellant/complainant for repayment and the same was dishonoured by the bank concerned. 8. During the pendency of the proceedings, the matter was referred by the learned Court below to the National Lok Adalat, which was scheduled for 14.12.2019, to explore the possibility of the matter being amicably settled by way of a compromise between the parties. 9. It appears from the record that on 14.12.2019, neither any authorized representative of the complainant nor the Counsel representing the complainant appeared before the Lok Adalat, which led to passing of the following order by the National Lok Adalat:- Case is taken up before the bench of National Lok Adalat, but none has appeared on behalf of the complainant. It appears that complainant is not interested to pursue the matter. In view of the unexplained absence of the complainant, proceeding with Section 256 Cr.P.C. the proceedings are stopped and the accused is acquitted. File after due completion be consigned to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scovery and production of any document; (c) the reception of evidence on affidavits; (d) the requisitioning of any public record or document or copy of such record or document from any court of office; and (e) such other matter as may be prescribed. 15. This section further provides that without prejudice to the generality of the powers contained in sub-section (1) thereof, every Lok Adalat or Permanent Lok Adalat shall have the requisite powers to specify its own procedure for the determination of any dispute coming before it. 16. Sub-Section (3) provides that all proceedings before a Lok Adalat or a Permanent Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193, 219 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code and every Lok Adalat or Permanent Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a civil court for the purpose of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 17. Section 20 of the said Act deals with cognizance of cases by Lok Adalats and sub-section (1) of the same provides as under:- (1) Where in any case referred to in clause (i) of subsection (5) of section 19- (i) (a) the parties thereof agree; or (b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , if there was meeting of minds. 23. A compromise or settlement cannot be forced upon the parties. In other words, in case one of the parties does not appears before the Lok Adalat where their case stands referred for compromise or settlement, the only inference which can be prudently drawn is that the party is not interested in having the matter compromised. That being the situation, the Lok Adalat has to thereafter proceed by ordering that as the matter could not be settled between the parties, the same is referred back to the court from which it was sent for the purpose of compromise or settlement. However, by no stretch of imagination, the Lok Adalat can confer upon itself the powers of a regular criminal Court and proceed as per the provisions of Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as has been done in the present case by the Lok Adalat. 24. It is reiterated that Lok Adalat is not a substitute for a regular Court and in the absence of the powers enshrined under Section 256 of the Criminal Procedure Code being expressly conferred upon the Lok Adalat by the provisions of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, the same, by no stretch of imagination, can be exercise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ense with his attendance and proceed with the case. 29. Hon ble Supreme Court of India in Associated Cement Co. Ltd. vs. Keshvanand, (1998) 1 Supreme Court Cases 687, has been pleased to hold that the purpose of including a provision like Section 256 is that it affords some deterrence against dilatory tactics on the part of a complainant who set the law in motion through his complaint. An accused who is per force to attend the court on all posting days can be put to much harassment by a complainant if he does not turn up to the court on occasions when his presence is necessary. The Hon ble Court was further pleased to observe that the same does not mean that if the complainant is absent, the Court has a duty to acquit the accused in invitum . 30. Hon ble Supreme Court of India in Mohd. Azeem vs. A. Venkatesh and another, (2002) 7 Supreme Court Cases 726, has been pleased to held as under:- 2. The petitioner filed a criminal complaint under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short CrPC ) against Respondent 1 in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad for an alleged offence under provision of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pon merits, due to non-appearance of the complainant on the date of defense evidence, who was sincerely pursuing his remedy, was improper. 32. Coming to the facts of the present case, as I have already mentioned hereinabove, the provisions of Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be exercised by the Lok Adalat. Not only this, the 1987 Act does not confer any power upon the Lok Adalat to dismiss the case in default on account of nonappearance of a complainant or proceed against the respondent side ex parte on the failure of the respondent to appear before the Court. When the case was referred to the Lok Adalat in order to explore the possibility of a compromise between the parties, dismissal of the complaint by the Lok Adalat for want of attendance of the complainant is, but obvious, an act beyond the jurisdiction of the Lok Adalat. As the respondent stands acquitted by way of the impugned order, therefore, the order passed by the Lok Adalat could have been assailed by the present appellant only under the provisions of Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in terms of the law laid down by this Court in H.P. Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. vesus M.P.S. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
