Order on Board

06/01/2025

1. The State Counsel has accepted the advance copy of this CRR.

2. The present criminal revision is filed under Section 438 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashment of the order dated 08.11.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, Bemetara (C.G.) (Under The Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Act

2005) District- Bemetara (C.G.) whereby the application filed by the applicant under Section 317 of Cr.P.C. has been rejected, bail bonds of the applicant has been discharged and issued the arrest warrant against the present applicant.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 09.08.2016, the complainant Ramsanehi Baghel has made a written report to the police of Police Station- Nandghat, District- Bemetara (C.G.) against one Makhanlal Satnami. The complaint was made to the effect that, upon consistent allurement and insistence of accuse Makhanlal Satnami, that, his amount would be tripled within a period of 5 years, on 16.04.2010 he has given first installment of Rs. 14,500/- and a total sum of Rs. 57,500/- to Makhanlal Satnami. But after completion of term of 5 years, Makhanlal has not given his Rs. 90,000/-. Upon asking he informed that, he has deposited the amount with the Director namely Gurvinder Singh of B.N. Gold Real Estate Ltd. Branch New Delhi and this is how, the complainant has defrauded by Makhanlal Satnami and action be taken against him and amount of Rs. 90,000/- be given to him.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on 08.11.2024 the case was fixed for further orders and on the said date the applicant was ill therefore his counsel has moved an application under Section 317 of Cr.P.C. along with the relevant medical documents and sought for condonation of non-appearance of the applicant but the learned Trial Court has not applied its judicious mind and has rejected the application under Section 317 of Cr.P.C. vide its order dated 08.11.2024. He further contended that the applicant is a resident of Jalandhar (Punjab) and • therefore on each and every hearing it is practically not possible for him to appear before the learned Trial Court.

5. Learned Counsel for the State raised no objection in this regard.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection.

7. On perusal of record it transpires that on 23.10.2024 the matter was fixed for further orders and on the said date the counsel for the applicant filed an application under Section 317 of Cr.P.C. seeking exemption from appearance on the ground that the father of the applicant is not keeping well and the learned Trial Court had allowed the said application and the matter was fixed again for further orders on 08.11.2024. Again, on 08.11.2024 the counsel for the applicant moved an application under Section 317 of Cr.P.C for condonation of non-appearance of the applicant and submitted prescription of Dr. Sushil Puri of Puri Poly Clinic & Acupuncture Centre, Jalandhar, Punjab (Ex. P/3) and the doctor has advised him to take rest for 2 days. Since the applicant is a resident of Jalandhar, Punjab it is not possible for him to appear before the Court below on each and every hearing.

8. On perusal of record it is crystal clear that some of the accused have already absconded and on 08.11.2024 the case was fixed for production warrant of other co-accused namely Vikas Kumar and Vinay Kumar.

9. The learned Trial Court without appreciating the fact that the applicant is a resident of Jalandhar (Punjab) and on that date it was not possible for him to appear in person. The Trial Court has not only rejected the application for condonation of non- appearance of applicant but also discharged the bail bond and issued arrest warrant against the applicant.

10. Section 317 of Cr.P.C., 1973 provides that

317. Provision for inquiries and trial being held in the absence of accused in certain cases (1) At any stage of an inquiry or trial under this Code, if the Judge or Magistrate is satisfied, for reasons