(1) CRI. APP. 2018.2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2018 OF 2009 Terna Setkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Ternanagar, Tq. and Dist. Osmanabad, through it's authorised Officer Trimbak S/o Vikram Bakle Age : 59 years, Occu.: Service, R/o As above .. Applicant VERSUS Prabhu S/o Yamaji Rathod, Age : 52 years, Occu.: Labour Contractor, R/o Mandwadi, Post Ghatnandur Tq. Parli, Dist. Beed .. Respondent Mr. P.S. Pawar, Advocate for the applicant None present for the respondent ... CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. DATED : 17TH MARCH, 2010 PER COURT:- 1] This Criminal Application is seeking to challenge the order dated 16.2.2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Osmanabad in Summary Criminal Case no. 345 of 1997 whereby the applicant’s complaint was dismissed for default and the respondent-accused stood discharged. The applicant is a co-operative sugar factory. The (2) CRI. APP. 2018.2009 respondent-accused had issued a cheque which bounced and the summary criminal case was launched under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Despite of efforts, the applicant could not serve the respondent-accused with the process issued by the Courts below. For many days, this impasse continued and ultimately the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint. Against this dismissal, this Application is filed. 2] Before the merits of the Application could be examined, this Court decided the applicant’s application seeking condonation of delay that had caused in making of this Application. Notice of such application was issued to the respondent- accused. Even this time, he avoided service of the notice but the Bailiff succeeded in serving the notice on his son. I think, there is no point in waiting for service of notice of main application which is said to be awaiting service. The respondent-accused is not likely to be served as it appears that he is avoiding service. 3] Having regard to the facts of the case, I am of the view that the applicant-complainant should have been helped by the Court below in causing service on the respondent-accused. The case is of serious nature and the complaint could not have been dismissed for default. The Criminal Application is (3) CRI. APP. 2018.2009 allowed. The order dated 16.2.2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Osmanabad stands set aside. The S.C.C. no. 345 of 1997 stands restored. Sd/- (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.) arp