THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.295 of 2011 DATED:18-02-2011 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the docket order, dated 28-12-2010, in C.F.R.No.3699 of 2010 on the file of the learned I Additional Munsif Magistrate, Tenali, whereby the complaint filed by the petitioner was dismissed on the ground that he was absent. 2. There were money transactions between the complainant and the 2nd respondent and in that context 2nd respondent issued a cheque bearing No.923430, dated 20-04-2010, drawn at State Bank of Hyderabad, Tenali for Rs.1,70,750/-. When the said cheque was presented, it was returned with an endorsement ‘insufficient funds’. Under those circumstances, after following the procedure provided for under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for brevity, ‘the Act’), he filed the said complaint. The complaint was numbered as C.F.R.No.3699 of 2010 and as stated supra, as the complainant was absent, the same was dismissed. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the record. 4. Apparently, the Court below has not taken cognizance of the offence for the reason that it is in the stage of CFR. No doubt, complainant was called absent on 28-12-2010 and on two previous occasions also he was absent. The same, in my considered view, is without any reason. However, it should be remembered that the said complaint is filed alleging the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act, wherein he has categorically stated that the cheque for an amount of Rs.1,70,750/-, when presented, was returned. Under those circumstances, it cannot be said that the complainant or the petitioner is not interested in getting the matter prosecuted. 5. Accordingly, Criminal Revision Case is allowed and docket order, dated 28-12-2010, in C.F.R.No.3699 of 2010 on the file of the learned I Additional Munsif Magistrate, Tenali is set aside and the complaint is restored to file. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner again does not appear before the Court, on the dates of adjournment, the Court below is at liberty to pass appropriate orders. As the complaint is at the stage of CFR, formal notice to the 2nd respondent is dispensed with. _______________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 18th February, 2011 Tsy