1 2025:CGHC:17277 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 322 of 2023 Smt. B. Aruna Madhavi W/o B.V.S.N. Murthy Aged About 42 Years R/o H. No. Mig- 04, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Ps- Sirgitti, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. Present Address- R/o C/o S. Srinagesh, H.No.-1-391/1, Behind Ctc, Rayuduvaripalem, Kakinada 533005 (Andhra Pradesh),...(Complainant) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - B.V.S.N. Murthy S/o B. Venkatrao Aged About 49 Years R/o H.No. Mig- 04, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Ps- Sirgitti, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. Office Address- B.E.M.L. Regional Office, Industrial Area, Sirgitti, Tifra, Bilaspur, Ps.- Sirgitti, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.,..(Accused) 2 - Smt. Geeta Chari W/o B.V.S.N. Murthy Aged About 50 Years R/o New Ganesh Nagar, Opp. Office Of The Nagar Panchayat, Tifra, Ps- Sirgitti, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. Office Address- Shiksha Karmi Grade I (Lecturer Panchayat), Government Higher Secondary School, Sardha, Block Belha, Ps And Tahsil- Belha, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vivek Kumar Shrivastava, Adv. For Respondent(s) : None. SB : Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Judgment on Board Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI Date: 2025.04.16 17:33:34 +0530 2 15.04.2025 1. This Acquittal Appeal has been preferred against the order dated 12.10.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur in Criminal Case No.38/2018, whereby, learned Magistrate due to absence of the complainant discharge the accused from the offence under Section 494 IPC. 2. At the outset learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the offence under Section 494 of the IPC is compoundable in nature and same is non cognizable offence. He would submit that during the pendency of the appeal, settlement has arrived at between the parties and in order to resolve the controversy between them a written settlement agreement has also been executed on 16.01.2015. In such circumstances, the appellant does not want pursue the matter further. In support of such contention, the appellant has also filed an application for permission to withdraw the appeal (IA No.1/2025). 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record. 4. The complainant has filed the complaint case under Section 494 IPC against the respondent/accused and after registration of the offence the same was listed for the charge before evidence. However, on the last date of hearing i.e. 12.10.2018 when the complainant did not appear and remain absent and since the offence is compoundable in nature, the trial Court has passed the order under Section 249 Cr.P.C. and discharge the accused from the said offence. 3 5. Section 256 Cr.P.C. generally entitles the accused for acquittal if the complainant is absent and under Section 249 Cr.P.C. the Magistrate has discretion to proceed with the case. 6. Further, in the instant case since no judgment of acquittal has been passed by the trial Court, so the acquittal of appeal preferred by the appellant/complainant itself is not maintainable. 7. In the result, the acquittal appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. 8. Other ancillary application, if any, stands disposed of. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Ajay