Section 256 CrPC requires judicial discretion before dismissing a complaint when evidence is complete and presence is unnecessary.

Section 256 CrPC is meant to address non-appearance of the complainant, but a Magistrate must exercise the power to acquit judicially. Where the complainant had already completed evidence, the matter had reached the judgment stage, and personal attendance was not necessary, dismissal for default was not in accordance with law. The record also showed that no opportunity or notice was given before the complaint was dismissed. The dismissal was therefore unsustainable and was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Trial Court for disposal on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the complaint could be dismissed under Section 256 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 when the complainant had already completed evidence, the matter had been posted for judgment, and the complainant's presence was not necessary.

Analysis: Section 256 is intended to deal with non-appearance of the complainant, but the discretion to acquit the accused must be exercised judicially. Where the complainant's evidence is complete and the case has reached the stage of judgment or defence-related proceedings, the complainant's personal attendance may not be necessary. In such circumstances, the Magistrate should consider whether adjournment is proper or whether attendance can be dispensed with under the proviso. A dismissal for default in a situation where the matter was not required to proceed through the complainant's presence is not in accordance with law. The record also showed that the complainant was not given an opportunity or notice before the complaint was dismissed.

Conclusion: The dismissal of the complaint under Section 256 was unsustainable and was set aside; the matter was remitted to the Trial Court for disposal on merits in accordance with law.

---