- (1.) B. P. Singh, J. This is an application for revision against the order dated 21st October, 1991 passed by the XII Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, in Criminal Case No. 2015 of 1991 Sheetal Prasad v. Hari Narain Nigam.
(2.) SHEETAL Prasad has filed a private criminal complaint against Hari Narain Nigam (Editor of the Newspaper Hindustan Times) under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. The said complaint (Criminal Complaint Case No. 4372 of 1988) was pending in the Court of XII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut. The accused had put in appearance and on 25-1-1991 the application of the accused for being exempted from personal appearance was allowed and personal presence was dispensed with. It was ordered that the accused be represented througeh his pleader Mr. Puri. Thereafter, the case proceeded and an application was again moved on behalf of the accused under Section 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) praying that his personal presence may be dispensed with and the substance of the charge or charges may be explained to his counsel. This application of the accused was rejected on 21-10-1991. It is against this order that Hari Narain Nigam has come in revision. Shri S. A. Gilani has put in appearance for the complainant and has also filed a counter affidavit.
(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and the learned A. G. A. The main contention of the applicant's counsel is that because of his job exigencies, the applicant was not in a position to attend the hearing in courts on all the dates which are fixed. It was also contended that the applicant is also busy in day-to-day affairs of the publication of the Hindustan Times, which is a National Daily Newspaper. On the other hand, the contention of the learned counsel for the complainant is that the order in question was an inter locutory order and no revision lay against the same.;