1 2025:CGHC:12765 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 1164 of 2024 1 - Smt. Usha Dewangan W/o Late Shri Manohar Lal Dewangan, Aged About 50 Years By Caste-Kosta, R/o Ramsagar Para Ward, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District-Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Sabiya Khatun W/o Shri Mohd. Samshad, Aged About 49 Years R/o Dhobi Chowk, Risaipara Ward, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District-Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Sweksha Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order On Board 18.03.2025 1. The appellant/complainant has filed this appeal assailing order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) in Complaint Case No. 999/2021 by which the complaint filed by the complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has been dismissed for want of prosecution. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that the complainant had given Rs. 2,00,000/- to the respondent from year 2017 to 2019 by cash as well as by account transfer as lend and the respondent had assured that the amount shall be returned back soon. On demanding the said amount, the respondent had given cheques bearing No. 049483 of Rs. 1,50,000/- and 049488 of Rs. 50,000/- to the complainant payable in BHUMIKA ANGARE Digitally signed by BHUMIKA ANGARE Date: 2025.03.20 10:50:03 +0530 2 Union Bank, Branch Dhamtari, dated 10.03.2021 and 20.03.2021 respectively total amounting to Rs. 2,00,000/-. The said cheque was deposited by the complainant in the bank but the same was dishonoured and returned back to her with a note “Funds Insufficient”. Thereafter, the complainant sent legal notice to the respondent which was received by her on 27.03.2021. Thereafter, the complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the matter was listed before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class on 02.06.2021 and since then she was regularly prosecuting his complaint. Thereafter all of a sudden on 24.10.2024 despite repeated calls neither complainant nor her counsel appeared therefore, the complaint filed by the complainant has been dismissed for want of prosecution. This order has been assailed by the complainant in this appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the complaint was pending since 2021 and the same was dismissed on 24.10.2024 for want of prosecution whereas from 02.06.2021 to 05.10.2024, counsel for the complainant was sincerely prosecuting the case. He would further submit that the learned trial court has adopted hyper technical view while dismissing the complaint whereas the learned trial Court should have given an opportunity to the complainant. He would further submit that the order passed by the learned trial Court is perverse, illegal and contrary to the material on record, therefore, the same is liable be to be quashed and would pray for restoration of the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposing the submission made by learned counsel for the complainant/appellant would submit that the impugned order is legal and justified and does not warrant any interference by this Court and would pray for dismissal of the appeal. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record with utmost satisfaction. 6. From perusal of record, it is quite vivid that the complainant was sincerely prosecuting the case before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class from 02.06.2021 to 05.10.2024 and only in last one 3 occasions, she remained absent, there must be some bonafide reason for her absence. Learned trial Court has taken hyper technical view while dismissing the complaint as the complaint is pending for since last four years thus, the order dated 24.10.2024 dismissing the complaint filed by the complainant for want of prosecution, is perverse and illegal, warranting interference by this court, as such, the impugned order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari is quashed. 7. Accordingly, the instant appeal is allowed. The complaint filed by the complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is restored to its original number. The complainant/appellant as well as respondent are directed to appear before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari on 08th May, 2025 and thereafter the learned Court will proceed with the matter in accordance with law. 8. A copy of this order be sent to the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhamtari for compliance. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Bhumika