High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 03 P&H CK 0152

Madhu Bala vs Kanta Rani and Another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 11 March 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal No. 381-SB of 2009 (O and M)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 387 words

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.

Criminal Misc. No. 61051 of 2010

1.

This is an application for listing the main appeal on an actual date for hearing.

2.

After hearing counsel for the parties and for the reasons stated in the application, it is allowed and the appeal is taken up on board for final hearing and disposal.

Criminal Appeal No. 381-SB of 2009

3.

Appellant had instituted a complaint against the Respondents for an offence punishable u/s 500 IPC. On 20th March, 2006, Appellant was not present in the Court and the complaint filed by her was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 20th March, 2006. Thereafter, she moved an application for its restoration, but the same was dismissed, as in a summons case dismissal of the complaint amounts to acquittal. Therefore, the Appellant was left with no other remedy but to file the present appeal. Learned Counsel states that leave to appeal has been granted.

4.

It is stated that on 28th January, 2006 the complaint case was adjourned to 20th March, 2006 by the trial Court, but wrongly the complainant and her counsel noted the date as 22nd March, 2006. It is stated that due to this inadvertence and bonafide mistake, the complainant could not cause appearance on 20th March, 2006. Hence, the complaint was dismissed for want of prosecution.

5.

A Coordinate Bench, on 5th February, 2009 had condoned the delay in filing the appeal, for the reasons mentioned in the application. Leave to appeal was granted and the present appeal was admitted.

6.

Considering the explanation furnished by the Appellant that due to a bonafide mistake, she could not attend the Court on the date fixed, as the date was wrongly noticed, this Court is of the opinion that the present appeal is required to be allowed and the order, whereby the complaint was dismissed, ought to be set aside.

7.

Accordingly, present appeal is accepted and the impugned order dated 20th March, 2006 is set aside. The complaint is restored at its original number and the parties are directed to cause appearance on 28th April, 2011 before the Court of Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), Ludhiana, where the complaint was pending. Record of the trial Court be sent back forthwith.

8.

With the observations made above, present appeal is disposed of.