1. Heard Sri Anay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 14.7.2022 passed in Complaint Case No. 817 of 2021 (Vidhu Gupta vs. Arvind Kumar Pal) u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the complaint of the applicant herein filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonor of cheque amounting to Rs. 8,90,000/- has been dismissed for want to prosecution on the part of the applicant vide impugned order dated 14.7.2022. The reasons for non-appearance of the applicant herein before the trial court concerned has been explained by the applicant from paragraph 13 to 22 of the affidavit filed in support of the instant application and the same are reproduced herein as under:-

"13. That it is also relevant to mention here that though the case was filed by the applicant through his counsel Sri R.K. Srivastava but since Sri R.K. Srivastava is old and ailing person a/a 75 years, he has handed over the file of the present complaint case to be looked after to his junior associate Sri Dhanesh Nath Pandey, Advocate who was properly looking after the case. A true copy of Adhaar card of Sri R.K. Srivastava is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure No.4 to this affidavit.

14. That it is also relevant to point out here that apart from the present complaint case, the applicant has also filed other 6 complaint cases u/s 138 of N.I. Act arising from the same transaction of bouncing of cheque towards the sale consideration which are as hereunder:-

1. complaint case no.454 of 2021 Dr. Vidhu Gupta Vs. Pankaj Kumar Maurya

2. complaint case no.815 of 2021 Dr. Vidhu Gupta Vs. Sanjay Kumar Vishwakarma

3. complaint case no.453 of 2021 Dr. Vidhu Gupta Vs. Sanjay Kumar Vishwakarma

4. complaint case no.819 of 2021 Dr. Vidhu Gupta Vs. Pankay Kumar Maurya

5. complaint case no.816 of 2021 Dr. Vidhu Gupta Vs. Hari Shankar Singh

6. complaint case no.818 of 2021 Dr. Vidhu Gupta Vs. Hari Shankar Singh

15. That the files of all the aforesaid complaint cases including the present complaint case were allocated to Sri Dhanesh Nath Pandey who was looking after those cases efficiently. It is also relevant to state here that the complaint case no.816 of 2021 Dr. Vidhu Gupta Vs. Hari Shankar Singh and complaint case no.818 of 2021 Dr. Vidhu Gupta Vs. Hari Shankar Singh were withdrawn due to satisfaction of payment by the accused and after those withdrawal, five complaint cases were being looked after by Dhanesh Nath Pandey.

16. That unfortunately Sri Dhanesh Nath Pandey, Advocate died in the first week of May, 2022 due to covic-19 pandemic, which would be evidence from the proposal of the District Bar Association, Bhadohi at Gyanpur dated 4.5.2022. A true copy of the proposal of the District Bar Association, Bhasohi at Gyanpur dated 4.5.2022 is being filed herewith and marked as Annexure No.5 to this affidavit.

17. That after proper time has elapsed, the original counsel in all the complaint cases had visited the house of late Sri Dhanesh Nath Pandey, Advocate from where he was returned 6 files, out of which, two complaint cases were withdrawn and remaining four complaint cases were being taken care of by late Sri Respondent R.K. Shrivastava, Advocate, the present counsel.

18. That the family or the office of the deceased counsel did not return the file of the present complaint case no.817 of 2021 due to mistake and the original counsel Sri R.K. Srivastava being old and ailing person could not keep track on the 7th file i.e. the present complaint case no.817 of 2021 as the file of the said complaint case was not returned by the deceased counsel namely late Sri Dhanesh Nath Pandey, Advocate and present complaint case no.817 of 2021 remained unattended.

19. That the applicant who has two daughters, one of which has settled abroad in USA and second daughter has settled in Bangalore and the applicant being senior citizen is mostly staying with his daughter at Bangalore.

20. That in the first week of June, 2024 when the applicant enquired about the complaint cases pending before the learned court below, detail of one case corresponding to cheque was missing.

21. That when the counsel for the applicant enquired in the office about all the complaint cases corresponding to 7 cheques, he came to know that the present complaint case no.817 of 2021 in respect of cheque no.000008 dated 15.01.2021 fir Rs.8,90,000/- was listed on 14.07.2022 on which date, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi at Gyanpur has passed an order dismissing the present complaint case no.817 of 2021 in default of appearance and in absence of evidence u/s 200 of Cr.P.C.

22. That after coming to know about the order dated 14.07.2022 on 04.06.2024 the counsel for the applicant without any further delay has obtained certified copy of the order dated 14.07.2022 on 4.6.2024 itself and is filing the present criminal misc. application u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. because he has no other alternative remedy. The delay in filing the present criminal misc. application u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. is not deliberate but due to the reasons as stated above specifically for the reason that the counsel for the applicant has allocated the present complaint case no. 817 of 2021 to be looked after by late Sri Dhanesh Nath Pandey, Advocate along with other 6 complaint cases arising from the same transaction but unfortunately the said counsel has died on 14.5.2022 due to covid-19 pandemic and after his death his office or family members committed mistake in not returning the file of the present complaint case no. 817 of 2021 and out of 7 files they returned the file of only 6 complaint cases and the original counsel being old and ailing person could also not keep track of the present complaint case no. 817 of 2021, file of which was not returned to him but when the applicant came from Bangalore to his native place Bhadohi in the first week of June, 2024 and upon his enquiry, the fact of passing the order dated 14.7.2022 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi at Gyanpur has came to the knowledge of the applicant as well as his counsel and without any further delay, the present criminal misc. application u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. is being filed. Hence, the delay in filing the present criminal misc. application u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. may be condoned in the interest of justice and the same may be treated to have been filed within time and be heard on merits."

4. In view of the aforesaid explanation, offered by the applicant, sufficient cause has been shown by the applicant for his nonappearance and non-prosecution of the complaint case. In the given circumstances, since the opposite party no. 2 has not yet been summoned and the complaint was dismissed at presummoning stage, therefore, this Court do not find any good reason to issue notice to opposite party no.2 and keep the matter pending here.

5. For reasons as noted hereinabove, this Court finds that there was sufficient cause for non-appearance and non-prosecution of the case by the applicant as his counsel, who was entrusted with the complaint case has died due to Covid-19. Hence, the impugned order dated 14.7.2022 is quashed and the instant application is allowed.

6. The Complaint Case no. 817 of 2021 is restored to its original number and the trial court is directed to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law subject to the condition that the applicant herein shall appear before the trial court concerned within two weeks from today.