JUDGMENT :

(Lalitha Kanneganti, J.)

1. This criminal appeal is filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") assailing the docket order dated 05.09.2019 passed in C.C. No. 447 of 2018 by learned Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ramachandrapuram wherein the complaint was dismissed and the accused was acquitted as per Section 256 of Cr.P.C.

2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 1/accused borrowed an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from the appellant/complainant on 08.05.2016 for the purpose of meeting her family expenses as well as other debts and executed promote in favour of the appellant agreeing to repay the same with interest at 24% per annum. Subsequently on repeated demands by the appellant, respondent No. 1 issued cheque No. 854655 dated 29.10.2017 for Rs.2,00,000/- towards part satisfaction, but the same was dishonoured on its presentation with an endorsement "funds insufficient". The appellant issued legal notice dated 09.11.2017 demanding respondent No. 1 to pay the cheque amount and the same was received by her on 10.11.2017 but as she did not chose either to give reply or to pay the amount, the appellant filed private complaint and the same was numbered as C.C. 447 of 2018. The trial Court has dismissed the said case on 05.09.2019 and passed the following docket order:

"Complainant called absent. No representation. Accused absent. Petition filed and allowed. Though the matter was kept aside till 4.40 p.m., the complainant nor his counsel represented the matter and costs imposed by his Court was not paid, which shows that the complainant is not interested to proceed with the matter. The presence of P.W. 1 is necessary today for proceeding the matter and the matter is coming for continuation of chief evidence of P.W. 1 i.e. for marking of documents since last five adjournments and the complainant did not turn up for continuation of marking of documents Having no other go, this court inclined to dismiss the complaint under Section 256 of Cr.P.C. This complaint is dismissed U/Sec. 256 Cr.P.C. and accused is acquitted as per Section 256 Cr.P.C."

Aggrieved by the above docket order, the appellant/complainant is before this Court by way of this appeal.

3. Heard Sri Phani Teja Cheruvu, learned counsel for the appellant and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No. 2-state. Though notice was served on respondent No. 1 on 04.01.2020 as per track consignment, there is no representation on her behalf.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Court below ought to have given further, opportunity by imposing further costs instead of dismissing the case. He submits that as learned counsel for the appellant was suffering with viral fever and the appellant was suffering with high blood pressure and diabetes as on 05.09.2019 they failed to attend the Court on said date but the Court below without appreciating the fact that case record shows regular attendance of the appellant without fail, has dismissed the case without giving further opportunity to the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that on all occasions either the appellant was present or an application was filed on his behalf except on the date when the matter was dismissed on 05.09.2019. It is submitted that non-appearance of the petitioner and his counsel on the said date was neither willful nor wanton. He submits that the appellant will suffer irreparable loss if the case is not restored and the Court below without considering all these facts has dismissed the petition.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed daily status of the case with regard to the adjournments undergone from 01.07.2019 to 05.09.2019 before Court below, by way of memo. A perusal of the same shows that on most of the occasions, petitions were filed and the same were allowed. The proceedings dated 01.07.2019 shows that costs imposed earlier were paid, chief examination affidavit