Disposed¶22

Smt. Anita Sinha v. Johar Tekam

Chhattisgarh HC19 Apr 2026CRMP/912/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Leave to file acquittal appeal under S. 419(4) BNSS 2023 granted to complainant against Appellate Court acquittal in S. 138 Negotiable Instrument Act cheque case; trial conviction: one year SI + fine Rs. 3,00,000/- (default 6 months SI); acquittal on failure to prove proprietorship of Aryan Steel, Puri and failure to substantiate legally recoverable debt with documents; CRMP 912 of 2026 to be registered as regular Acquittal Appeal; Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal; North Bastar Kanker; decided 20/04/2026; 2026:CGHC:17862.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to the petitioner/complainant to file an acquittal appeal under Section 419(4) BNSS; Registry directed to register CRMP No. 912 of 2026 as a regular Acquittal Appeal and list it in the next week. ¶22

Smt. Anita Sinha Vs Johar Tekam — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed SUMIT by SUMITKUMARDate: KUMAR 2026.04.2110:25:25 +0530

¶3

2026:CGHC:17862

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

CRMP No. 912 of 2026

¶7

Smt. Anita Sinha W/o Shri Bhisan Sinha Aged About 32 Years Proprietor - Aryan Steel, Village - Puri, Charama, P.S. And Tahsil - Charama, Distt. - North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

Johar Tekam S/o Shri Ramji Tekam Aged About 32 Years R/o Village - Dumarkot, Post - Baijanpuri, P.S. And Tahsil - Bhanuprattappur, Distt - North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh

¶11

... Respondent(s)

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate

¶13

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.)

¶14

Order on Board

¶15

20/04/2026

¶16

Heard.

¶17

This is an application under Section 419(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of leave to file acquittal appeal.

¶18

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was the complainant before the learned trial Court, he was prosecuting a complainant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act against the respondent in which the respondent was convicted by the learned trial Court and sentenced for simple imprisonment for one year with fine of Rs. 3,00,000/-, in default of payment of fine, additional simple imprisonment for 6 months. The said judgment of conviction and sentence was challenged by the respondent before the Appellate Court and the Appellate Court has allowed the appeal and acquitted the respondent on the ground that the petitioner has failed to prove that he is the owner/proprietor of the Aryan Steel, Puri and also on the ground that he could not substantiated by filing relevant documents about the legally recoverable debt. He would also submit that there is statutory presumption in favour of the complainant, particularly when the issuance of cheque has not been denied by the respondent.

¶20

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the application for grant of leave is allowed.

¶21

The Registry is directed to register the present CRMP as regular Acquittal Appeal and list the case in the next week.

¶22

The present CRMP is disposed of.

¶23

Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE

¶24

Sumit

Smt. Anita Sinha v. Johar Tekam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Anita Sinha v. Johar Tekam

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

Santram Yadav Vs Executive Engineer

Ramkumari Kaushik Vs Smt. Kiran Bhajgawalli

Narottam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Laxmaniya Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ajay Sidara Vs Renu Jogi

Rameshwar Kumar Mehar Vs State of Chhattisgarh