1 2025:CGHC:23378 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 254 of 2025 1 - Teejram S/o Late Mahettar Aged About 65 Years R/o- Village Adhbhar District Sakti (C.G.) At Present R/o- Shanti Nagar P.S. Banki Mongra Tahsil Katghora District Korba (C.G.) ... Appellant. versus 1 - Lalit Kumar Rathore S/o Late Parasram Rathore Aged About 45 Years R/o- Village Hardi Police Chowki Adhbhar District Sakti (C.G.) 2 - Chhotelal Rathore S/o Late Savadram Rathore Aged About 69 Years R/o- Village Hardi Police Chowki Adhbhar District Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Shri FS Khare, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Judgment on Board 12/06/2025 1. The present Acquittal Appeal has been preferred against the order dated 18.02.2025 passed by the Special Judge SC & ST (Prevention of AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2025.06.13 15:20:39 +0530 2 Atrocities) Act, Korba, Chhattisgarh in Special Case (SCST) No.1382 of 2024 whereby, complaint filed by the appellant was rejected. 2. It is pertinent to mention that against dismissal of a complaint under Section 226 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (old Section 203 of Cr.P.C), no appeal would lie and the complainant may prefer a revision against the order for further enquiry in view of the provisions contained under Section 439 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which reads as under: 439. Power to order inquiry. - On examining any record under section 438 or otherwise, the High Court or the Sessions Judge may direct the Chief Judicial Magistrate by himself or by any of the Magistrates subordinate to him to make, and the Chief Judicial Magistrate may himself make or direct any subordinate Magistrate to make, further inquiry into any complaint which has been dismissed under section 226 or sub-section (4) of section 227, or into the case of any person accused of an offence who has been discharged: Provided that no Court shall make any direction under this section for inquiry into the case of any person who has been discharged unless such person has had an opportunity of showing cause why such direction should not be made. 3. In view of the aforesaid legal provisions, this Court is of the view that since there is an alternative remedy available to the appellant under the law, the appeal would not be maintainable. 3 4. Accordingly, this Appeal stands disposed of as not maintainable reserving liberty in favour of the complainant to avail the appropriate legal remedy, if so advised. 5. Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned order and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining the photocopy of the same. 6. Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court. 7. Accordingly, the Appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Avinash