1 2025:CGHC:45036 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2552 of 2025 Radhelal Berman S/o Late Puranlal Berman Aged About 62 Years R/o Near Babla Dudh Diary, Yadav Para, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus Sushant Kumar Singh S/o Shri Siddheshwar Singh R/o Block-D, Flat No. 119, Aviva Green City, Near Durga Mandir, Dunda Sejbahar Road, P.S. Mujgahan, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Sanat Thakur, Advocate For Respondent : Not noticed Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 03.09.2025 1. Heard on IA No. 02/2025 for condonation of delay in filing the acquittal appeal. SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.09.04 12:01:10 +0530 2 2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Delay of 37 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. The Petitioner has challenged impugned order dated 26.04.2025, passed by learned JMFC, Raipur in Criminal Complaint Case No. 7282/2022. 4. Facts of the case reveal that the petitioner filed a complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondent on December 15, 2022. The court took cognizance, registered the case, and issued notice to the respondent. Despite notices being issued on payment of process fee by the complainant on multiple occasions, the respondent failed to appear. Consequently, bailable warrant was issued against the respondent upon payment of process fee by the complainant. However, even after issuance of bailable warrant, the respondent did not appear. Subsequently, on the specified dates (June 13, 2024, September 20, 2024 and December 24, 2024), the complainant failed to pay the process fee as directed by the learned JMFC. Based on this, the learned JMFC dismissed the complaint under Section 204(4) of the CrPC, prompting the present petition. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Respondent is not present till date. He further submits that the impugned order passed by learned JMFC is erroneous and 3 contrary to the law, therefore, the instant petition may be allowed and the impugned order may be set-aside. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and adhering to the settled principle of law that parties should be afforded a proper opportunity of hearing, I deem it just and proper to allow the petition in the interest of justice. 8. Hence, the impugned order dated April 26, 2025, passed by the learned JMFC, Raipur (C.G.), is hereby set aside. The Trial Court is directed to restore the complaint case to its original number and dispose it of in accordance with law, affording the parties a fair opportunity to be heard. 9. Accordingly, the Cr.M.P. is allowed. The Petitioner/complainant is directed to appear before the Trial Court on 07.10.2025. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham