THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR Criminal Revision Case No. 1966 of 2009 Date: 24.11.2009 Between: K. Pydi Rao .. Petitioner/Complainant State of A.P., rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR Criminal Revision Case No. 1966 of 2009 Judgment: This revision has been filed challenging the order dated 18.08.2009 passed in C.C. No.801 of 2005 by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, dismissing the complaint. The petitioner is the de facto complainant. The order of the lower Court is as follows. “Complainant continuously called absent. It shows that the complainant has no interest in this case. Batta also not paid under Rule 235 CRP. In the result, complaint is dismissed under Section 204 Cr.P.C.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was regularly attending the Court and that he has paid batta on several occasions and that notice could not be served on the accused and that his counsel noted the date of adjournment as 19.08.2009 instead of 18.08.2009 due to clerical mistake and that an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to contest the matter. It is always better if the matters are disposed of on merits. The order of the lower Court does not show on what dates the complainant was absent and how many times he had paid batta and under what circumstances the summons could not be served on the accused. Since the order of the lower Court is very cryptic, the same is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the revision case is allowed at the admission stage and the impugned order dated 18.08.2009 passed in C.C. No.801 of 2005 is set aside subject to the following conditions. The petitioner/complainant shall attend the Court regularly and he must pay batta within 15 days from the date of posting the complaint in the lower Court. However, if the complainant does not show any interest in prosecuting his case in future and if he failed to pay batta, the learned Magistrate may pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. ______________________ B. CHANDRA KUMAR, J. Date: 24.11.2009 Nsr