Dismissal of complaint for non-prosecution – Petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. – Maintainability of -- On account of absence of complainant on one occasion dismissal of the complaint for non-prosecution was not justified, since, it is always desirable that a lis should be decided on merits, rather than, non-suiting the parties on technical grounds -- Present petition challenging the impugned order is maintainable and no fault can be found with the same -- Petition accepted; impugned order set aside and the complaint is ordered to be restored at its original number.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 08.01.2020

Dismissed in default -- In no way, by the absence, the complainant/appellant is to be benefitted nor there is anything on the record to show that there was any mala fide intention on the part of the complainant/appellant for his absence from the proceedings – Absence of the complainant on one date in the complaint case is no ground to dismiss the complaint.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 21.02.2017

Dismissed in default – It is settled law that the rights of the parties should be decided on merit as far as possible -- Court should do substantial justice between the parties and should not go into the technicalities of the law -- Where technical consideration and merit or cause of substantial justice are pitted against each other, the cause of merit and substantial justice is to prevail – Order dismissing the complaint in default is set aside.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 21.02.2017

Restoration of complaint -- Rights of the parties should be decided on merit as far as possible -- Court should do substantial justice between the parties and should not go into the technicalities of the law -- Where technical consideration and merit or cause of substantial justice are pitted against each other, the cause of merit and substantial justice is to prevail -- Complaint is restored at the stage from where it was dismissed by the trial Court.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 18.03.2016

Case fixed for accused’s appearance – Dismissal of complaint for non-prosecution – Dismissal in default followed by restoration application unnecessarily delays the disposal of complaint on merits than simply adjourning the case for a date – Complaint was not listed for any particular purpose, rather it was fixed for presence of accused by way of notice and presence of appellant was not necessary on that date -- Merely on that account of non-appearance, the complaint should not have been dismissed in default -- Complaint is restored to its original number.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 04.05.2015

Dismissal of complaint for non-want of prosecution -- Plea of wrong noting of date appears to be genuine -- Bona fide of the complainant is established from the fact that its representative had been appearing on each and every date -- Complaint is restored to its original number.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 04.05.2015

Power of Magistrate -- Magistrate has discretion to dismiss the complaint if on any date fixed for hearing the complainant fails to appear in the Court and at the same time, if the Magistrate finds that there is some reason or that the presence of the complainant was not required, he in his discretion can adjourn the complaint -- However, the Magistrate while acting under the said proviso has to take into consideration that the powers vested therein have to be exercised in the interest of justice.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 04.05.2015

Dismissed of complaint for want of prosecution – Case called several times but none has appeared and on that account, the complaint was dismissed for want of prosecution -- Cheque amount is stated to be Rs.10 lacs -- Nobody should be condemned unheard – Impugned order stands set-aside -- Complaint stands restored to its original number.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 30.01.2015

Dismissal of complaint for want of prosecution – Absence of complainant from the proceedings was not willful or intentional but due to justifiable reason and proceedings were pending for securing presence of the accused – Ld. trial Magistrate neither examined nor recorded any reasons if personal appearance of the petitioner could not be dispensed with on that day – Complaint filed by the petitioner is ordered to be restored.

(P&H HC) Decided on: 12.01.2015