1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 91 OF 2009 Chandrakant Trimbak Barche ..APPELLANT -VERSUS- Dnyanoba Nivrutti Gawane ..RESPONDENT Mr. V.D. Gunale, advocate for appellant. Mr. S.N. Morampalle, advocate for respondent. CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. Date : 15th October, 2010 PER COURT : 1. This appeal is filed against the order of dismissal of Complaint dated 6th December, 2004 passed by the learned IInd Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Latur in Criminal Case No. 7293 of 2001. The appellant was the complainant in the Lower Court. It was a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. On 6th December, 2004, the case was posted for framing of charge but since the complainant was absent, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class dismissed the complaint without verifying the fact that the Record and Proceedings of the complaint case were sent to Revisional Court, where certain orders passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class was challenged. Though on 6th December, 2004, the Revision was not pending, the Record and Proceedings were not received back at the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class. Without verifying this fact the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class seems hurriedly passed the order of dismissal. The order was not at all justifiable also because 2 the Revision which was filed against the previous orders of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class was decided in favour of the appellant-complainant. The approach of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class in dismissing the complaint was very casual. I went through the Roznama of the case and found that it was written in very casual manner. The learned Sessions Judge may take action regarding this against the concerned staff member. ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed. (ii) The complaint is reinstated. (iii) The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Latur shall now proceed with the case as per law. (A.V.NIRGUDE) JUDGE gas/cria91.09