THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2004 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order dated 20-09-2001 passed in C.C.No.80 of 1998 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adilabad, whereby dismissed the complaint for default. The brief facts are that the de facto complainant is doing business of cotton, oil cake, grains etc under the name and style of Gajanan Trading corporation at Nagpur as well as at Adilabad. During the course of business transactions, the accused became due to a tune of Rs.2,01,444/- and in order to discharge the same, he issued ten cheques each for Rs.10,000/- in favour of the complainant. On presentation of the said cheques, the same were returned by the Bank with an endorsement “insufficiency of funds”. The complainant after following the procedure under the Negotiable Instruments Act, filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Adilabad and the same was numbered as C.C.No.80 of 1998. On 20-09-2001, when the complainant called absent, the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint for default. The accused had not put in appearance as the process had not been paid, hence, this Court is of the view that the accused need not be heard in this matter. Apparently, the amount involved in the case is about Rs.2,00,000/- and it cannot be said that the petitioner is not evincing any interest in the matter. May be, it is true that he was absent on that particular day i.e., 20-09-2001, but on that ground the Court below ought not to have dismissed the complaint. Though the Court has given sufficient time, there are laches on the part of the petitioner for not paying the process in time. However, learned counsel for the petitioner expressed his willingness to pay the process. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the amount involved in the case on hand is about Rs.2,00,000/- and as the learned counsel for the petitioner is willing to pay the process, it is just and proper to afford one more opportunity to the petitioner by setting aside the order impugned herein. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the criminal revision case is allowed. _____________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 10-3-2011 rkk