1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No.3525 of 2008 (Madhusudan s/o Bhaskarrao Chavhan v. Arun s/o Gulabrao Jichkar) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Shri J.B. Kasat, Advocate for Applicant. CORAM : R.C. Chavan, J. DATE : 6th October, 2008 Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amravati on 29-12-2004, whereby the learned Magistrate condoned delay in filing a complaint for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, took cognizance and proceeded further in the matter. The applicant, who is accused before this Court, submitted to the jurisdiction of the Trial Court, participated in the full trial and when his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was being recorded, woke up and sought quashing of the order, whereby the cognizance was taken. 2 The learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Lehar Communication Pvt. Ltd. and others v. State of Maharashtra and another, reported at 2006 ALL MR (Cri) 2085, to support his contention that the applicant should have been heard before deciding the application for condonation of delay. There can be no doubt that the learned Magistrate ought to have heard, as a matter of principles of natural justice, the applicant before deciding the application for condonation of delay. But having submitted to the proceedings and allowed the proceedings for four years, the applicant cannot be allowed to set the clock back. This would be against the policy of ensuring that the cases are disposed of quickly. If this application is allowed, people would submit to the wrong orders initially and then take exception to them after a lapse of time involving wastage of judicial time and efforts. In view of this, no case for invocation of inherent powers of this Court is made out. The application is rejected. JUDGE Lanjewar