TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fit of the aforesaid Office Order cannot enure in favor of respondent No. 2 as he was declared an absconder on 06.10.2018 i.e., much prior to 20.02.2021 and also in view of the fact that the order dated 06.10.2018 came to be upheld by this Court on 22.03.2021. The respondent s No. 2 earlier petition before this Court also came to be dismissed while noting his conduct in delaying the trial. There is no gainsaying that the impugned order dated 12.04.2021 passed by the learned MM is not only ex facie bad in law but also in the teeth of the order dated 22.03.2021 passed by this Court and was passed on an erroneous reading of the aforesaid Office Order. During the course of submissions, it is also informed that an earlier petition filed on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s totaling to ₹ 32,00,000/-, which on presentation got dishonored. She further submits that the present matter relates to the year 2016 and the trial has not proceeded as respondent No. 2 for one reason or the other has deliberately delayed the trial. She submits that on the pretext of settling the matter, respondent No. 2 has continuously remained absent from the Trial Court and resultantly proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. were initiated against him and he was declared an absconder on 06.10.2018. It is submitted that thereafter respondent No. 2 preferred an application under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. seeking cancellation/stay of the order dated 06.10.2018, whereby he was declared an absconder , which also came to be dismissed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent No. 2 has appeared before the Trial Court. He, on instructions, submits that respondent No. 2 undertakes to appear before the Trial Court as and when the matter is fixed. He also submits that in this regard, respondent No. 2 shall also file a written undertaking in the form of an affidavit before the Trial Court within a period of two weeks from today. 4. I have heard learned counsels for the parties and have also gone through the case records. 5. As noted hereinabove, the present case emanates from complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on behalf of the petitioner. The respondent No. 2 had issued 11 cheques totaling to ₹ 32,00,000/-, which on presentation got dishonored and the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide/stay of the order dated 06.10.2018, which also came to be dismissed on 10.02.2021. Respondent No. 2 again approached this Court by way of CRL M.C. Nos. 459/2021 517-526/2021, which again came to be dismissed vide order dated 22.03.2021 and the orders dated 06.10.2018 and 10.02.2021 declaring respondent No. 2 as an absconder were upheld. 6. A perusal of the impugned order dated 12.04.2021 would show that the Trial Court, while granting stay on the order dated 06.10.2018 erroneously relied upon Office Order No. 256/RG/DHC/2021 dated 08.04.2021, whereby it was directed that on non-appearance of the parties, no adverse orders be passed against them. It is noted that the said Office Order was passed in continuation of its earlier Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the setting aside of the impugned order would further delay the trial; and that respondent No. 2 has undertaken to regularly appear before the Trial Court, the present petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The respondent No. 2 shall file a written undertaking in the form of an affidavit to the effect that he shall appear before the Trial Court as and when the matter is fixed. The undertaking be filed within a period of one week from today. (ii) The respondent No. 2 shall pay an additional cost of ₹ 40,000/-, as well as the previous imposed cost of ₹ 10,000/-, totaling to ₹ 50,000/-, to the petitioner within a period of ten days from today. 10. Considering that the present case pertai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
