1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2498 of 2025 Anjay Shukla S/o Late Vijay Shankar Shukla, Aged About 64 Years R/o Civil Line, Police Station- Civil Lines, Raipur, District- Raipur ( C.G. ). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Pramod Tiwari S/o Lallan Tiwari Aged About 54 Years R/o Near Mahavir School, Police Station -Gudhiyari, District- Raipur ( C.G. ). 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- District- Magistrate, District- Raipur ( C.G. ). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 11/08/2025 1. The present petition under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed challenging the order dated 14.10.2024 passed by the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur in Criminal Revision No.415/2024 whereby the revision filed by the petitioner against the order dated 11.01.2024 passed by the JMFC, Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.08.12 17:57:00 +0530 2 Raipur in Criminal Case No.1622/2019 has been dismissed. 2. It is a case of cheque bounce. On 11.01.2024, the JMFC, Raipur read out the particulars of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act to the petitioner, against which the petitioner preferred a revision i.e. Criminal Revision No.415/2024 which was dismissed vide impugned order dated 14.10.2024 leading to the filing of this petition. 3. The petitioner has challenged the order of the trial Court as well as the revisional Court on the ground that he had lodged a report of cheque theft at PS – City Kotwali, Raipur, on the basis of which there is a report of the hand writing expert, the signature of the accused was not found in the cheque and the police has filed a charge sheet. 4. On the other hand, the documents annexed with this petition reveal that the alleged cheque bearing No.000040 of HDFC Bank, Civil Line Raipur, amounting Rs.20,00,000/- was issued on a date prior to the complaint of the petitioner, which was dishonoured by the Bank due to insufficient funds, on the basis of which proceedings under section 138 of N.I. Act are going on. The particulars of the offence were read out to the petitioner which was challenged in revision and the revision has been dismissed 3 by the impugned order. As such, only after the trial, the truth can be ascertained as to which of the two things is correct. In such a situation, challenging the criminal proceedings is not found to be appropriate. 5. Thus, the present CrMP deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed at the motion stage. 6. The Registry is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Khatai