- (1.) These three petitions have been filed by the same petitioners against a common order dated 2-6-89 passed by the learned Magistrate in three different cases.
(2.) The petitioners are being prosecuted for not granting the award in favour of the non-petitioner No. 2. The petitioner were summoned by the learned Magistrate and an application Under Section 205 Cr.P.C. was filed for exempting their personal attendance and granting permission to be represented by their counsel. That application in all the three cases had been dismissed by the learned Magistrate by this common order dated 2-6-89.
(3.) Heard the learned Counsel and perused the order. The petitioners are being prosecuted for a technical offence. Some award was given in favour of the respondents and the petitioners were to comply that award. According to the petitioners that award was passed ex-parte and they have moved the Court concerned for setting aside that ex-parte award and the proceedings are still pending there mean while, they have been prosecuted for not complying the award This matter is not of that nature where the presence of the petitioners should be enforced by the learned Magistrate. Non-compliance of the award is a technical offence Even the petitioners had moved to set aside the award.;