Disposed¶20

U.K. Pandey v. Surendra Jain

Chhattisgarh HC26 Oct 2025ACQA/461/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; ACQA No. 461 of 2019; acquittal appeal by complainant against discharge order dated 11.8.2000 of JMFC Durg in Criminal Case No.187/98; offence under Section 500 IPC; complaint barred by limitation; Criminal Revision No.47/2001 withdrawn vide order dated 20.9.2012 with liberty under Section 378(4) CrPC; withdrawal of appeal permitted with liberty to file appeal under proviso to Section 372 CrPC before Sessions Court within 30 days; disposed of as withdrawn; Judge Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi; decision dated 27/10/2025.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the acquittal appeal with liberty to file an appropriate appeal against the impugned discharge order before the concerned Sessions Court, to be filed within 30 days. ¶20

U.K. Pandey Vs Surendra Jain — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

2025:CGHC:52293

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

ACQA No. 461 of 2019

¶6

U.K. Pandey S/o Late Bhagwat Prasad Pandey Aged About 55 Years R/o Kailash Nagar, Industrial Area, Bhilai, Police Station- Jamul, Tahsil And District- Durg, Revenue And Civil District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Appellant

¶8

versus

¶9

Surendra Jain S/o Shri Sonpal Jain Aged About 64 Years R/o Shop No. 307, Zonal Karket, Sector-10, Bhilai, Tahsil And District- Durg, Revenue And Civil District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

For Appellant : Mr. Palash Tiwari and Mr. V. Jayant Kumar, Advocates For Respondent : None present

¶12

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

27/10/2025

¶15

1. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that by filing instant acquittal appeal, the appellant/complainant has challenged the order of discharge dated 11.8.2000 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg in Criminal Case No.187/98, whereby the respondent/accused has been discharged from the offence under Section 500 of IPC on the ground that complaint filed by him is barred by limitation. He further submits that earlier that order was challenged by the appellant by filing Criminal Revision

¶16

Digitally signed by BINI BINI PRADEEP PRADEEP Date:2025.10.28 11:46:48 +0530

¶17

¶18

No.47/2001, which was permitted to be withdrawn by the appellant vide Order dated 20.9.2012 passed by this Court granting him liberty to file appeal under Section 378(4) of the CrPC. He further submits that the appellant wants to file appeal before concerned Sessions Judge in the light of proviso of Section 372 CrPC against impugned discharge order. Hence, he seeks permission to withdraw this appeal with liberty to file appropriate appeal before concerned Sessions Court.

¶19

2. On due consideration, prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant is allowed. He is permitted to withdraw this appeal with liberty as sought for with a condition that, if the appellant wishes to file appeal against the impugned order, then it be filed within 30 days from today before concerned Sessions Court.

¶20

3. In view of the above, the acquittal appeal is disposed of as withdrawn.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

¶23

Bini

U.K. Pandey v. Surendra Jain

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

U.K. Pandey v. Surendra Jain

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

Dharamraj @ Pintu Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lokesh Kumar Banjare Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Devanand Gadeval Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Shrawan Patel

Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited Vs Chhotelal Bhale

Rajesh Kumar Jain Vs Shyampal Tamrakar