The Jharkhand High Court in the case Nawal Kumar Kanodia @ Nawal Kanodia vs The State of Jharkhand observed and has noted that the intention behind the exemption from personal appearance of accused, as it is outlined under section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, CrPC in order to ensure that the accused individuals are not subjected to unnecessary harassment and that the complainant does not suffer any undue prejudice.
The bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi in the case observed and has stated that the purpose of the exemption as stated under section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, CrPC is that the order of the learned Magistrate should be such which does not make any kind of unnecessary harassment to the accused and at the same time does not cause any prejudice to the complainant and the learned court is required to ensure that exemption from personal appearance granted to the accused is not an abuse or delay the trial.
In the present case, the plea has been moved for quashing the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa in connection with a Complaint Case whereby, the court rejected the petitioners’ application moved under Section 205 of CrPC.
In the said case, the complaint was lodged against the accused, asserting that they persuaded the complainant to sell asbestos sheets, only to provide damaged ones and declining to settle an amount of Rs. 22.50 Lacs claim.
The accused submitted an application before the court under section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, CrPC to the Trial Court, but the said application was denied.
However, the accused seek response from the High Court. The court in the case observed that the case appeared to stem from a commercial dispute which leads to the filing of a complaint. It has been stated that the court allowed the application moved under section Section 205 CrPC is within trial court’s discretionary jurisdiction, it has been emphasized the need to balance this discretion with the avoidance of undue harassment to the accused.
The court observed that the petitioners’ status as high-ranking officials actively involved in various aspects of the company’s operation.
The court in the case highlighted the principle that while it is preferable to record evidence in the presence of the accused, exceptions can be made if their legal representation is available.
The court in the case observed and has stated that the purpose behind granting exemption under Section 205 CrPC is to prevent unwarranted harassment of the accused while safeguarding the complainant’s interests.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the court that the High Court overturned the order of Trial Court.
Accordingly, the court allowed the petitioners to be excused from personal appearances under specified conditions.