ALP-152-2024 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PRIVATE PARTY NO. 152 OF 2024 Venkat s/o Kishanrao Telang Age 54 years, Occupation Business, R/o: Jalkot, Taluka Jalkot, District Latur. … Applicant [Ori. Complainant] Versus Shakuntalabai w/o Ramesh Sutar Age Major, Occupation Business, R/o: Deshi Daru Dukan, CL3/13/2019-20, In front of Bus Stand, Ausa, Taluka Ausa, District Latur. … Respondent [Orig. Accused] ….. Mr. Rajendra R. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the Applicant. ..... CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J. Reserved on : 28.08.2026 Pronounced on : 01.09.2026 ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant-original complainant. None present for the respondent. 2. Instant leave application is at the behest of original complainant, whose proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) ended up in dismissal of complaint by invoking Section 256 of Cr.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that, proceeding bearing S.C.C. No. 1941 of 2019 was instituted against present 2026:BHC-AUG:39586 ALP-152-2024 -2- respondent alleging offence punishable under Section 138 of NI Act and on satisfaction, learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, (Court No. 4), Latur also issued process on 30.09.2019. Learned counsel submitted that, learned trial court dismissed the complaint on account of single instance of absence of the complainant’s Advocate and failure to take steps since last many dates. However, he pointed out that, complainant was vigilant in prosecuting the matter and he had also taken necessary steps, which can be seen from the roznama. 4. Learned counsel further submitted that, matter was diligently contested by the applicant in the trial court. That, on 30.11.2023, applicant had filed application Exhibit 33 for issuance of N.B.W. against the accused, on which order also came to be passed on the same day. However, thereafter the Court was on leave on 12.01.2024. On 13.03.2024 and 08.05.2024, though complainant and his Advocate were present, matter was adjourned due to absence of accused and his Advocate. Only on 23.07.2024, complaint and his Advocate were absent. However, due to applicant’s absence on that single date, by observing that applicant is not interested in prosecuting the complaint, the same is dismissed under Section 256 of Cr.P.C.. Hence this Application. ALP-152-2024 -3- 5. Considering the above, in the interest of justice and in view of the statement made across the bar that applicant is ready to diligently workout the matter, applicant deserves an opportunity to prosecute his complaint. Hence, the following order : ORDER I. The Application is allowed. II. Leave is granted to file Appeal. III. Registry to register the Appeal. In Appeal, the following order is passed : IV. The impugned order dated 23.07.2024 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (Court No.2), Latur in S.C.C. No. 1941 of 2019 is hereby set aside. V. The matter is remanded back to the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (Court No.2), Latur, who shall conduct hearing afresh by affording opportunity to both sides to adduce evidence and decide the matter on its own merits. VI. Parties shall appear before the learned trial court on 21.09.2026 and further dates and future course shall be decided by the learned trial Judge. VIII. The appeal is accordingly disposed off. [ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.] vre