THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.10993 of 2011 ORDER: Petitioner approaches this Court invoking the provisions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the order passed by the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, in Crl.M.P.No.3545 of 2011 in C.C.No.5985 of 2006 dated 19.08.2011, whereby the learned Magistrate issued Non Bailable Warrant against the petitioner. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The respondent-complainant preferred a complaint against the company called Radico Khaitan Limited and others. The Chairman and Managing Director of the company represented before the Court by invoking the provisions under Section 305 of Cr.P.C. and various persons represented on behalf of the Chairman and Managing Director of the said Company. In the year 2009, one Umesh filed an application under Section 305 Cr.P.C. to represent on behalf of the present petitioner, who is the Chairman and Managing director of the said company. On one occasion the said Umesh failed to appear before the Court. Hence, warrant was issued against the said Umesh. Later, the said Umesh appeared before the concerned Court and filed an application to recall the warrant. On filing such petition, the learned Magistrate recalled the warrant, but at the same time, directed the petitioner herein who is the Chairman and Managing Director of the Company to appear before the Court. The learned trial Judge passed the order on the ground since the said Umesh is absent and now the warrant is also recalled for the further proceedings by observing that the petitioner should appear before the Court and also observed in the order that the earlier order passed by invoking the provisions under Section 305 Cr.P.C. stands vacated. For vacating the said order, the learned Magistrate has not given any reasons and further it is to be noted when an application filed U/Sec.305 Cr.P.C. and a person is directed to represent on behalf of the company and when the said person is absent before the Court, it is the duty of the Court to issue notice to the person concerned, who is the Chairman and Managing Director directing him to engage some other person or to appear before the concerned Court. Without following the same, the learned Magistrate recalled the warrant against the said Umesh and directed the petitioner to appear before the Court and the petitioner is also not aware of the said order. Hence, he could not able to appear before the Court. Now, the learned Magistrate issued warrant against the petitioner. The trial of the case is almost completed and the said Umesh also answered before the Court when the accused was questioned U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C. 4. Considering the above said facts and circumstances of the case, the warrant issued against the petitioner is hereby recalled and the said Umesh is directed to continue his appearance on behalf of the petitioner herein to represent the Chairman cum Managing Director of the said Company, till the disposal of the trial before the concerned Court. 5. With the above observation, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. The Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, filed along with this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 9th November 2011 Rns