- (1.) This revision has been filed against the order dated 28.10.2010 by which the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-Vth, Agra has dismissed the Complaint Case No. 1879 of 2008, under Sections 420, 406, 120-B I.P.C.
(2.) In brief, the facts of the case are that the complainant-revisionist, Sukhvir Singh Kohali, filed complaint against three accused persons. After filing of the complaint, statement was recorded under Section 200 Code of Criminal Procedure and thereafter, statements of the witnesses-Pratibha Singh and Girish Madho were recorded under Section 202 Code of Criminal Procedure Ultimately, the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint vide order dated 11.8.2010, and against this order, the revisionist has filed this revision.
(3.) I have heard Shri Ali Hasan, learned Counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. Learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 is absent. Learned Counsel for the revisionist argued that a perusal of the order-sheets of the lower Court indicates that on 4.6.2010 and thereafter on 25.6.2010, it was ordered that notice for appearance be sent to the complaint. The next date fixed in the case was 11.8.2010, on which date, the lower Court, without noticing as to whether the notice served or not, dismissed the complaint due to his absent.;