Shailendra Kumar Baghel Vs Awadh Ram Narang

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:8395

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

ACQA No. 7 of 2025

¶6

Shailendra Kumar Baghel S/o Shri Kirtan Singh Baghel Aged About 37 Years R/o Ratnabandha Road, Panchmukhi Hanuman Nagar Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. Pin 493773. ... Appellant.

¶7

versus

¶8

Awadh Ram Narang S/o Shri Ramadhar Narang R/o Ward No. 03, Nagaridih, Post Kaitha, Tahsil And Block Hasaid, District Shakti Chhattisgarh.

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

For Appellant. : Mr. Curtis Collins, Advocate. For Respondent : None (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas)

¶11

Order on Board

¶12

18/02/2025

¶13

The appellant has filed this Acquittal Appeal under Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 being aggrieved by the order dated 8-10-2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari in Complaint

¶14

2

¶15

case (NIA) No. 2346 of 2023 whereby the complaint case filed by the appellant has been dismissed for want of prosecution.

¶16

The brief facts as reflected from the record are that the complainant is acquaintance of the respondent due to which the complainant had given Rs.3,00,000/- on 27-3-2022 cash and Rs.50,000/- through online in total amount of Rs.3,50,000/- and in turn the respondent had issued cheque bearing No.000001 of IDBI Bank amounting to Rs.3,50,000/- on 10-10-2023. On 25-10-2023 the complainant deposited the aforesaid cheque in the State Bank of India, Dhamtari for clearance. On 26-10-2023 the said cheque was returned back with endorsement that due to insufÏcient fund in the account of the respondent, the said cheque was dishonoured. The complainant /appellant through his counsel sent a legal notice to the respondent on 21-11-2023 by the registered post which was served upon the respondent / accused. Nether he has replied to said notice norm paid the aforesaid amount. Therefore, the appellant/complainant filed a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on 26-12-2023 against the respondent/accused. During pendency of the complaint case, the matter was listed on 8-10-2024 before learned JMFC. On 8-10-2024 the complainant did not appear despite repeated calls, therefore, the complaint filed by the complainant has been dismissed for want of prosecution. This order has been assailed by the complainant in this appeal.

¶17

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the complaint case was pending since 2023 and the same was dismissed on 8-10-2024 for want of prosecution whereas counsel for the complainant was sincerely prosecuting the case. He would further submit that the

¶18

3

¶19

learned trial court has adopted hyper technical view while dismissing the complaint whereas the learned trial Court should have given an opportunity to the complainant. He would further submit that the order passed by the learned trial Court is perverse, illegal and contrary to the material on record, therefore, the same is liable be to be quashed and would pray for restoration of the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶20

Despite notice respondent has chosen not to appear before the Court

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the appellant/complainant and perused the documents placed on record with utmost satisfaction.

¶22

From perusal of record, it is quite vivid that the complainant was sincerely prosecuting the case before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class and only last two occasions, he remained absent, there must be some bona fide reason for his absence. Learned trial Court has taken hyper technical view while dismissing the complaint as the complaint case is pending for the last two years. Thus, the order dated 8-10-2024 dismissing the complaint filed by the complainant for want of prosecution, is perverse and illegal, warranting interference by this court, as such, the impugned order dated 8-10-2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari is quashed.

¶23

Accordingly, the instant appeal is allowed. The complaint filed by the complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is restored to its original number. The complainant/appellant as well as respondent are directed to appear before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari on 28^th April, 2025 and thereafter the learned Court will proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

¶24

4

¶25

A copy of this order be sent to the learned learned Judicial Magistrate

¶26

First Class, Dhamtari for compliance.

¶27

RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Date: 2025.04.03 13:28:35 +0530 Raju

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE

Shailendra Kumar Baghel v. Awadh Ram Narang

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailendra Kumar Baghel v. Awadh Ram Narang

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Sheela Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Milibai Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Akhilesh Kumar Bharadwaj Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Toran Sonkar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Manisha Sharma Vs Umesh Kumar Dewangan

Smt. Rama Meshram Vs State of Chhattisgarh