IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Cr.M.P.No. yam OF 2010 $§ngE$ E‘Eww $‘ PETITIONER Prakash Chand Parakh, ACCUSED S/o. Birdichand Parakh, aged about 41 years, Through Prakash Kirana Stores, Sambalpur, R/o. Village and Post Sambalpur, Tahsil Bhanupratappur, District Kanker (C. G.)' VERSUS RESPONDENT COMPLAINANT Jain Cycle Store, Dalli Rajhara, Through ' Proprietor Shri Gautam Chand Jain, S/o. late Shri Sultanmal Jain, aged about 49 years, R/o. at and post Dalli 'Rajhara, Tahsil Balod, District Durg (C.G.). PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF Cr. P. C. WW . .....Qmwfa..m..§a3 Ago mm ..............................................W ................................................ mmw‘a . r . awmqm ' ‘noii i 7!me l anri 5L §# wuai'xiiiara i fv’iohw 'Shrivas‘iava..J. G-1’!=2019 on” m“: Rame$h u nu'mar $Mrma, coui‘lsei :nor Mme peLiiici’ler. £ an“ m“: rxsmsn M _ outaiia. m“- COU Sel K E... wl me Ll reSITJGi'Iu‘em. The iaéiiiioner in ihis peii’iim” is facit‘ug ti‘iai rm iiie wmpain‘z : oi E ihe gmiaraie L g ‘xr‘siruméryi Aci iii Eriminai ‘ase .. Daiii Raihra. Lima. The peii oner—Praka$h Chaim“ Fai‘akh wail“ an a; Séciim‘r 317 Cr.i'-‘.C. befcxre ii‘ye Magistraie (m a 45iu$146uu mm m (Ariiiexure PM} which waS rejecieti tm tiiai Véry a‘ : am u l waii ¢oi1u$ E i were canaeiieri aa“ the Cami beiéw i$$uéu .I .‘.” nun-nauwie t :i i ram. l. Aggriaved I‘ the io‘ o r, a revisicri peiiiioru was prefeireci wh r”wGumuiu . ..-.,~..-. n =__ In C haS apm‘éaci‘ued ‘mia ueurt iav fning H tnis f The 'peiitiOiier in This; petiuun 'oeiiiiori untier Seciion £82 SrF‘-C. 'ieved bv i‘eie Lioru of hi3 apniic Lion fm‘ / exempiioii from a‘ppearanee aiici $‘miss~‘i ‘f hi3 fevi$ion petition by {he reviSio'nai Coui Leariieci couii$ei for ihe' peti‘iarier at The out$et s-ubmiiiecr tnai ne i$ cam'mirig hi$ a‘p'piicaiion oriiy in t na‘ier of cnaiienge to reieciien oi‘ i“ a - 0. munn nr;nnmna K.) on iiie gi‘o'u'nci of iiineSss 6f hi5; $an g Tieaii aiii‘ne‘ni at ; qbangawle. 'Ledmeu an an 9 r—.._ a». n- piicauun Iur gi‘ai‘ft of e‘x’em‘pLiOi‘l f u.u ana$ be submiiteri bi; iearned counsei for me p‘iiiionér ina‘r The exernpiicn w-‘$ n rn apnearance nieci uncier Seciicn i er i. c H _ - ... -3.’ II"\.( UH LSJUuléul \ who i$ unrjergoing' treatment regar S, ceuneei fer ii‘ie petitioner subriiis nei vicie eruer _.__ ueleu x": mm Que/461m m .m i the iviagieiraie rejeeieci The abpnceuo for eX‘n‘ipfion of appearance on the r i: ‘-- f 4. .u. greund that no meo‘icai certificate n- a been prociuceo I anri that I me petitioner i [111%W 3 , a h w r uv sa r e i i a i i G " mmatm .(_&é // is riot a‘ppeariiig béfore ihe Couri Siruce iong. ea‘ coumei f‘r. ihe peiitioi‘uer arguea‘ ihat the noi‘x-apv-rance cf ihe peiitionéf oru 25iG'uf‘2‘b‘iu a a -‘ was bai aiia‘ if the Court ‘rraa‘ ai y w§ih regaru ‘ ila tiie aii'mem of his Son, the Cami couki have direc’t u me pétiiioher to produce neciica§ Genilic‘ales. .u .ne . S'um’riiueu ‘ u .g man . ‘ mei‘é g ' 'aS no ii‘liéi‘l anu me petiiiohei' wee ieaii'v’ i‘ abici such cohciiiions‘as mav pe impueea‘ by u- me Cour-i emi he ‘ -‘ ' - ' ie i-asi opportuniiy i0 appeal oeieie a ; v. u” me coricerheé Ceuh. Learhee eO'u'hse ioi ihe petiiioher submiiiee‘ ihai upoh revieieh fiieu‘, ihe same has been uiisihissed, as not mainiaiha‘oie. The peiitiohei has how aopioauheci ihis euii oy g: uiaihg ihis petitiori unue: oeciioh 404 UII'U. Oh ihe other hahd, suhihissioi oi ieai‘ned counsel . aior the . i‘espom‘iehi is ihat from ihe impughee i oroer a ' peiiiionei has not appéared since Court beiow i'ejeoied the appiio-‘iim fihdihg ihai ho ihedioai oeumeate .433: was fuev/J ii ‘cahho‘i be said to he iiiegai n ' resuiiihg ih a‘ouse of the process oi iaw or miscarriage of iusiice so as io wariaht inie‘rferehce by ihis Coue. Taking ihio corrsicieraiioh the submissions made by iearneri counsel f‘r the parties anoi i‘nai i'ne petitioner sought exemption from appearahoe on 25/03/2010 on the grounu oi mness of his son who is said .- Lu .-oe receiving treatment for heart aiimeht at Bang- iore and aiso taking into consideration the nature oi offence aiiegeci agair t the petitioner, in the opinion of this Court, the petitioner is entitieti to on‘ opportunity. Moreover, if the Court has arry‘ u‘oubi in borxai’de of the grow-Id stated, ihe petitiénei‘ couici iae direclea L i to submit the meoiicai certiticate on subsequent dates. it ap 7’ i- e m3 i _: xr.‘ . -L-_ - ;_- .z._ f0 avoid the emcee -4 L: . .4... :a --a- .l £ ‘H s that the Couit ‘oeiow was swayea Loy the r tact t tthat tne peutioner has not appeared on L- --a: [tits that u : i r p 31mm . CW - Mgg‘lolu W 2 WW7 z ai [113% W