JUDGMENT :

A.M. Badar, J.

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith.

3. By these application, the applicant/original complainant is challenging the Order dated 08/01/2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nashik thereby rejecting her complaint for the offence punishable under Section Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for want of prosecution.

4. Heard both sides. The learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 1/original accused, opposed the application by contending that sufficient opportunity was granted to the petitioner/original complainant for adducing evidence and as the evidence is not adduced, the complaint came to be dismissed for want of prosecution. She drew my attention to adjournment application.

5. I have heard the submissions so advanced and also perused the impugned Order dated 08/01/2019 passed below Exhibit 1 dismissing the complaint for want of prosecution.

6. The complaint for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was fixed for recording evidence for the first time on 18/05/2018. On that day, the learned trial Magistrate was busy in passing Judgment in SC No. 3115 of 2014 and, therefore, the subject comp