THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.N. RAO NALLA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1490 OF 2009 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the docket order dated 26-08-2009 in C.C. No.382 of 2005 on the file of the learned III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, East Godavari at Kakinada, whereby the defence side evidence was closed as the petitioner failed to get the summons served on defence witnesses and the matter was posted for arguments. 2. The petitioner herein is accused and respondent No.2 is complainant in the above C.C. 3. For the sake of convenience, the petitioner and respondent No.2 are referred to as accused and complainant respectively. 4. That this Court while admitting the revision, stayed all further proceedings in the above C.C. vide its order dated 10-09-2009. Aggrieved by the same, complainant filed Criminal R.C.M.P. No.2386 of 2011 praying to vacate the interim stay, inter alia, contending that the revision itself is not maintainable against a docket order, that the above C.C. was filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, and that after completion of the evidence on behalf of the complainant, the matter was posted for defence evidence and summons were issued to the defence witnesses, but the accused failed to see that the summons were served on the defence witnesses, as such, the trial Court has rightly closed the defence evidence and posted the matter for arguments. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the complainant that the accused has filed this revision only with an intention to drag on the proceedings to save himself from the rigours of law. 5. When the vacate stay petition came up for hearing, at the request of the learned counsel on either side, the revision itself is heard and taken up for disposal. 6. After hearing both sides and after perusing the impugned docket order as well as the material on record, this Court is of the view that the accused would lose the chance of defending his case and disposal of the matter on merits, as such, in the interest of justice, the accused may be given an opportunity to serve summons on defence witnesses so that the C.C. may be disposed of on merits after recording their evidence. 7. In the circumstances, the impugned order dated 26-08-2009 in C.C. No.382 of 2005 passed by the trial Court is set aside directing it to give a reasonable opportunity to the accused to serve summons on defence witnesses and thereafter proceed further and dispose of the matter on merits in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. 8. With the above directions, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed. _________________ B.N. RAO NALLA, J Date:08-09-2011. PV