JUDGMENT Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 16.04.2005, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court IInd, Dehradun, in Criminal Revision No. 20 of 2004, whereby said court has affirmed the order dated 06.01.2004 passed by the trial court (Special Judicial Magistrate Ist, Dehradun) in Criminal Case No. 1771 of 2003. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the papers on record. 3. Brief facts of the case are that a criminal complaint case was filed by the petitioner on 05.03.2002 alleging that the respondent no. 3 issued a Cheque No. 584041 dated 10.08.2001 for an amount of Rs. 1,30,000 which was dishonoured due to the instruction – ‘stop payment’. It appears that several dates were fixed in the aforesaid criminal complaint. On 28.10.2003 and 01.12.2003 the complainant remained absent but sought his exemption through counsel which was allowed. Thereafter, the Magistrate fixed 03.12.2003 but neither the complainant (present petitioner) nor his counsel appeared in court. The trial court (special Judicial Magistrate Ist Dehradun) gave another opportunity by fixing 08.12.2003 in the case. Again the complainant and his counsel remained absent. For third time one more date was given fixing 17.12.2003 but once again complainant as well as this counsel remained absent like on the previous dates. Finally 06.01.2004 was fixed. On said date that the complainant did not appear nor his counsel appeared and the Magistrate dismissed the complaint. Aggrieved by said order the complainant filed criminal revision no. 20 of 2004 before revisional court, after hearing the parties the same was dismissed vide impugned order dated 16.04.2005. Hence this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that infact the Reader of the court had told the complainant that the next date fixed was 09.01.2004, as such there was no occasion on the part of the complainant to appear on 06.01.2004. This court is failed to understand as to how 09.01.2004 was the date disclosed to the complainant as he remained absent not only on 17.12.2003 but also prior to it on 08.12.2003 and 03.12.2003. 5. This court is failed to understand as to how 09.01.2004 was the date disclosed to the complainant as he remained absent not only on 17.12.2003 but also prior to it on 08.12.2003 and 03.12.2003. 5. Having gone through the papers on record, this court does not find any illegality committed by the trial court in dismissing the criminal complaint after the complainant failed to appear in person or through his counsel continuously on one after another dates. 6. Therefore, the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. is dismissed.