2025:CGHC:12127 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 845 of 2024 Dewangan Sunglass Through Proprietor - Chhabilal Dewangan S/o Ghudau Ram Dewangan, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Main Road Jamkotpara Kondagaon Tahsil And District Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Appellant (s) versus Nirdesh Diwan S/o Baliram Diwan Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Chhepdapara Bhanpuri, Tahsil Bastar District Bastar (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Appellant : Mr. K.K. Baharani, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Shikhar Shukla, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 11.03.2024 1. The appellant has filed the present acquittal appeal against the order dated 25.05.2023 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kondagaon by which the complaint filed by the complainant has been dismissed for want of prosecution. 2. Facts of the case in brief is that the complainant has filed the complaint before Judicial Magistrate First Class Kondagaon against the respondent alleging that the cheque dated 27.09.2021 for Rs. 4,00,000/- bearing cheque no. 26923 has been dishonoured due to insufficient fund. The record of the case would show that the SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA Date: 2025.03.12 10:06:07 +0530 complaint was registered on 04.12.2021 and thereafter the matter was fixed for 27.12.2021 for appearance of the accused thereafter the matter was taken on various dates and the accused never present before the Court therefore, learned trial court vide impugned order has dismissed the complaint for want of prosecution by recording his finding that probably the complainant is not interest to prosecute the case and has acquitted the accused. Being aggrieved with this order the acquittal appeal has been filed. 3. counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant for vigilant to prosecute the case and only one occasion he was absent before the Court and the counsel engaged by his was duly representing the case of the appellant, therefore, the finding recorded by the trial court is perverse and would pray for quashing of the impugned order. 4. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the order passed by the trial court is legal, justified does not warrant interference by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. The record of the case would show that no summon has been served upon the accused which also show that as to how the criminal cases are being proceed in the complaint case and without understanding the difficulty faced by the complainant the Magistrate in a arbitrary manner has dismissed the complaint only on one absence of the complainant before the court though he was prosecuting the case with due vigilant, considering this aspect of the matter, I am of the view that the impugned order dated 25.05.2023 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kondagaon deserves to be and it is dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the Acquittal appeal is allowed. Since the appellant and the respondent have entered their appearance, therefore, no notice is required to issue by the Court. The complainant and the respondent shall appear before the trial court 08.05.2025 thereafter the trial Court shall proceed in the case in accordance with the law. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Santosh