ANANDA CHANDRA NAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Devashis Panda, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Prem Kumar Patnaik, learned Additional Government Advocate.

(2.) The petitioner Ananda Chandra Naik has filed this application under section 482 of Cr.P.C. challenging the impugned order dated 15.10.2004 passed in 2(c)C.C. Case No.03 of 2002 in rejecting the application under section 205 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for dispensing with his personal attendance.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Devashis Panda contended that the complaint case was registered on the basis of a P.R. submitted under sections 26 and 27 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereafter '1947 Act') and in such type of case, since summary trial procedure is to be adopted, the personal attendance of the petitioner was not required and therefore, the petitioner filed application for dispensing with the personal attendance and it was rejected on the ground that summons was issued to the petitioner but the adult member of the family refused to receive the summons and it was affixed on the front door of the house of the petitioner and that the petitioner was declared as an absconder as he was avoiding to attend the Court.