1 crapn1315.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1315 OF 2010 Sahebrao Vyankatrao Deshmukh, Age: 54 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Samjhota Colony (Gajanan Nagar) Dist.Parbhani. ...APPLICANT VERSUS Vishwambher s/o Ranganath Gunde, Age: 44 years, Occ: Service, R/o. Rachana Nagar, (near MIDC), Basmat Road, Parbhani. ...RESPONDENT ... Ms. Rashmi P. Gour, Advocate for applicant. Mr. M.P. Gude, Advocate for respondent sole. ... CORAM: S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 17TH FEBRUARY, 2011 PER COURT : . Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Counsel for the respondent. 2. This application is filed by the applicant, challenging order dated 27-10-2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court 2 crapn1315.10 No.1, Parbhani below Exhibit-1 in S.C.C. No.462 of 2006. 3. It is not necessary to advert to the facts of the case. Suffice it to say that since the applicant was absent on the date, when the matter was fixed for hearing, by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parbhani. As a result, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parbhani dismissed the complaint for want of prosecution. Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parbhani in the impugned order observed that the complainant was absent. No application was filed. The Court has also recorded that the case is old one and pending since long and further record discloses that the applicant is absent since long and failed to pursue matter, which clearly indicates that matter ought to have been settled in between the parties out of Court. 3 crapn1315.10 4. Upon hearing Counsel for the applicant and respondent, I am of the opinion that the applicant should get fair opportunity. However, it is also important to note that the Magistrate was constrained to observe in the impugned order that the applicant was absent on 27-10-2009. However, from perusal of the record discloses that the applicant/complainant is absent since long and hence, the Court dismissed the matter. 5. In this view of the matter, if the applicant/complainant deposits Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only) before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.1, Parbhani within four weeks from today. On such deposit of Rs.10,000/-, order dated 27-10-2009 stands quashed and set aside. It is made clear that unless amount of Rs.10,000/- is deposited with Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.1 Parbhani, the complaint Exhibit-1 in S.C.C. No.462 of 2006 will not get 4 crapn1315.10 revived automatically. The deposit of Rs.10,000/- is a precondition for restoration of the complaint below Exhibit-1 in S.C.C. No.462 of 2006. 6. Therefore, in the result, the impugned order dated 27-10-2009 passed below Exh.1 in S.C.C. No.462 of 2006 is set aside subject to deposit of Rs.10,000/- by the applicant within four weeks from today. After deposit of Rs.10,000/-, complaint at Exhibit-1 in S.C.C.No.462 of 2006 is restored to its original file. After deposit of Rs.10,000/-, on an application by the respondent, the concerned Court will consider the prayer of the respondent herein for costs. 7. The application stands disposed of, in above terms. sd/- [ S.S. SHINDE, J.] sut/feb11/crapn1315.10