THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1774 OF 2010 ORDER: 1 This revision is directed against the orders dated 06.05.2010 in C.C.S.R.No.8003 of 2009 on the file of the court of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Eluru whereby the complaint preferred by the complainant was dismissed on the ground that the complainant was absent. 2 The petitioner herein being the complainant filed the said complaint under sections420 of IPC and under sections 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act stating that the cheque bearing No.456375 dated 13.06.2009 issued by the 2nd respondent herein was dishonoured by the banker with an endorsement “insufficient funds” and after following the procedure provided under section 138 of the Act, the said complaint was filed. 3 As stated supra on 06.05.2010 when the matter was called, as the petitioner was absent, and as there was no representation on his behalf, the said complaint was dismissed. 4 The usual notice to the unofficial respondent is dispensed with for the reason that the court below has not taken cognizance of the matter and issued summons to the accused. 5. Heard the counsel for the petitioner. 5 The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as there was communication gap between the petitioner and his counsel in the court below, he could not attend the court on the said date and hence the court below ought to have given an opportunity to the petitioner by adjourning the case to some other date instead of dismissing the same. 6 The order impugned in this revision reads as follows: “This is the complaint filed by the complainant against the accused for the offences punishable under sec.420 IPC and Sec.138 and 142 of NI Act. Complainant absent. He is irregular and did not attend court right from the beginning. Hence complaint is dismissed for default.” 7 From a reading of the said order, it appears that the said order is passed under section 203 Cr.P.C. When once it is an order passed under section 203 Cr.P.C. a revision is maintainable. 8 Now the petitioner submitted the circumstances under which he could not be present before the court below on the particular date. The said contentions put forth by the petitioner appear to be true and genuine and hence they are accepted. 9 Accordingly this revision is allowed, the order dated 06.05.2010 passed in C.C.S.R.No.8003 of 2009 by the court below is set aside and the said C.C.S.R.No.8003 of 2009 is restored to its file. The court below is hereby directed to proceed with the case in accordance with law. -------------- Kvsn 04.10.2010