IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.57645 of 2007 RAJAN NANDA, SON OF LATE H.P. NANDA, ESCORTS FINANCE LTD., N-6, PRATAP BUILDING, CANNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI …………………….. PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. DEO NATH SINGH, S/O LATE RAMADHAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF C-178, POLICE COLONY, ANISHABAD, P.S. – GARDANIBAGH, DISTRICT – PATNA. ………………… OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 03/ 07.04.2010 Heard the parties. This is an application for setting aside the order dated 14.08.2006 passed by S.D.J.M, Patna in Complaint Case No. 1026 (C) of 2006 by which application of the petitioner under Section 205 Cr. P. C for allowing him to appear through his lawyer has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the Chairman of the Escorts Finance Company and is required to attend necessary meetings and also has to travel for looking after the affairs of the company. It is further submitted that it is not possible for him to attend the Court on each and every dates. However, the prayer has been rejected, taking into consideration the nature of allegation is that the petitioner published an application form alluring and asking the public for fixed deposit schemes with a interest of 8.5 per cent per annum for more than 12 months and even the staff of the company approached and impressed and highlighted the scheme for investment and the complainant investigated but after the period of maturity the maturity amount is not being paid and the amount has criminally - 2 - misappropriated, fraudulently and dishonestly. However, in this case the petitioner is the Chairman and there is allegation against the petitioner that the amount is not being paid even on maturity. However, the question for consideration whether any useful purpose is going to be served by requiring the personal attendance of the accused or whether the progress of the trial is likely to be hampered on account of the absence of the accused. However, the Magistrate at any stage of the trial or the court below at any stage of the trial, if comes to a conclusion that the accused person is trying to delay the completion of the trial, it is free for the court concerned to reject the dispensation of personal appearance and directing the personal attendance of the petitioner on a date as and when required by the court and hence the court can call for the petitioner at any important stage when it requires in the interest of justice. In this position of law and taking into consideration the hardship to the petitioner who is the Chairman and is ready to face the trial and to co-operate and no useful purpose is going to be solved by appearance of the petitioner on each and every date and it is a great hardship as the petitioner has his office and work at the having seat at Delhi and it appears that the learned lower court did not take into consideration the attending circumstances that no useful purpose is to be served by appearance and further the trial court at any stage of the trial may direct the personal appearance so requires in the interest of justice, the petition is allowed. The order of the lower court is set aside and the petition is allowed, however, subject to condition that - 3 - the petitioner will take permission of the court while leaving the country i.e. going out side the territory of India and the petitioner shall appear on a date fixed, if and when so required by trial court at any particular stage in the interest of justice. Kundan (Gopal Prasad, J.)