Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Ramdas Bhagwan Bankar, filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, against respondent no.1, Ku. Ujwala Panjabrao Lahamge, in Summary Criminal Complaint Case No.11 of 2007. Process was issued on 15.7.2008. On 28.8.2009, the complainant remained absent, and the complaint was dismissed for want of prosecution under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. On the same day, the complainant moved an application for restoration, which was allowed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chandrapur. Aggrieved, respondent no.1 filed Criminal Revision No.49 of 2010 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur, who set aside the restoration order, holding that there was no provision in the CrPC for restoration of a complaint dismissed in default under Section 256. The applicant then filed the present application under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash the revisional order and restore the complaint. The High Court observed that the dismissal under Section 256 is not an acquittal but a dismissal for default, and the Magistrate has inherent power to restore such a complaint to secure the ends of justice. The court noted that the revisional court's view was erroneous. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the application, set aside the impugned judgment dated 24.8.2010, and restored Summary Criminal Complaint Case No.11 of 2007 to the file of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chandrapur, with a direction to decide it expeditiously.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Restoration of Complaint - Section 256 CrPC - Inherent Power - The Magistrate has inherent power to restore a complaint dismissed for default under Section 256 CrPC, as the dismissal is not an acquittal but a procedural default. The court held that the Magistrate can restore the complaint to secure the ends of justice, and the revisional court erred in setting aside the restoration order. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a Magistrate has the power to restore a complaint dismissed for default under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in the absence of an express provision for restoration.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the application, set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 24.8.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Criminal Revision No.49 of 2010, and restored Summary Criminal Complaint Case No.11 of 2007 to the file of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chandrapur, with a direction to decide it expeditiously.
Law Points
- Magistrate has inherent power to restore complaint dismissed for default under Section 256 CrPC
- Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act
- 1881
- Criminal Procedure Code
- 1973
