1 2025:CGHC:55350 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3419 of 2025 Chandra Kishor Tiwari S/o Dewaram Tiwari Aged About 56 Years Partner M/s Tiwari Construction, R/o Infront Of Nagar Nigam Office, Kedarpur, Police Station And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Surguja C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Singh Enterprises Through Proprietro Ranjit Singh, Son Of Late Kameshwar Singh, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Bangali Chowk (Larangsay Chowk), Boripara, Ring Road, Police Station And Tehsil Ambikapur, District Surguja C.G. 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. (Respondent No. 2 Is Necessary Party But Not Mentioned In Annexure P-1) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Swapnil Keshari, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 13/11/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, being aggrieved by the order dated 18.09.2025 2 passed by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, District- Surguja, C.G. in Criminal Revision No. 19/2025 whereby revision preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 02.04.2025 has been dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner and one Shivshankar Tiwari are partners of M/s Tiwari Construction and there were business transactions between the Tiwari Firm and Singh Enterprises. During the course of business transaction, Shivshankar Tiwari furnished security cheque of SBI Bank, Collectorate Branch, Ambikapur bearing cheque no. 533452 amounting to Rs. 12,00,000/- (Twelve Lakh rupees) to the Singh Enterprises without the knowledge of the petitioner. When the petitioner gain knowledge about the said fact, he filed an application to stop the payment of the said cheque on 11.11.2019 and on the said request/application, the bank stopped the payment of said cheque. It is further alleged that the respondent/accused without the knowledge and consent of the petitioner, furnished the amount in the said cheque and deposited the cheque for encashment which was bounced stating stop payment. The petitioner filed a complaint before the police Station- Ambikapur on 06.08.2022 and 03.10.2022 but the police did not initiate enquiry. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned JMFC committed error while dismissing the application on the ground of delay. The Courts below has not considered the fact that prior to 3 filing of application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The petitioner made complaint before the police against the respondent. 4. Learned State Counsel submits that the order passed by the courts below are true and correct and does not suffer from any infirmity, illegality and does not need any interference. 5. Heard learned counsels for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Perusal of record shows that the petitioner and Shivshankar Tiwari are partners of M/s Tiwari Construction Firm and had business transactions with M/s Singh Enterprises. In the month of October, 2019, the petitioner’s firm required steel for construction for which Shivshankar Tiwari, partner of M/s Tiwari Construction contacted respondent no. 1 and finalised a deal that payment would be received from the PWD department after supply of rod. The respondent no. 1 agreed, saying they need a cheque as a security. Shivshankar Tiwari provided the respondent no. 1 with a pre-signed cheque bearing no. 533452 amounting to Rs. 12,00,000/- (Twelve Lakhs) of State Bank of India, Collectorate Branch, Ambikapur dated 21.10.2019 as security, of which the revisioner was unaware. Even after taking the said cheque, the respondent did not supplied the said material at the construction site and kept procrastinating on supplying the material. 7. Learned trial Court vide order dated 02.04.2025 has rejected the application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. stating that the cheque in question is dated 21.10.2019 but the petitioner has filed a 4 written complaint at Ambikapur police station on 06.08.2022 after the respondent filed complaint under Section 138 of NIA against the applicant. It is mentioned in the investigation report dated 05.08.2023 that the complainant himself has not cooperated in the police investigation. Meanwhile, Shivshankar Tiwari, admitted in his statement that, with the applicant’s consent rods were purchased on credit from the respondent’s firm for the building construction work. The respondent provided the material at the construction site, issued a bill for the total amount of Rs. 15,32,865/- for the rods and received a receipt. He then gave the bill to petitioner for payment. Following the dishonor of cheque, the respondent no. 1 filed a complaint case under Section 138 of NIA. Subsequently, the petitioner herein filed application under Section 156(3) of CrPC against the respondent no. 1, nearly four years after the incident. Therefore, there is no basis to register the offence against the respondent no. 1. 8. Learned revisional court vide order dated 18.09.2025 rejected the revision filed by the petitioner herein and affirmed the order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the learned trial Court. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the counsels, this Court is of the considered view that both the Courts below have passed the order after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, after applying their judicial mind. This Court does not find any infirmity or illegality or jurisdictional error in the orders passed by the Courts below, therefore, there is 5 no good ground to entertain this petition. 10. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed on merits. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima