1 2025:CGHC:41399 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 74 of 2020 1 - Suraj Saraf S/o Shri Satyanarayan Saraf Aged About 50 Years Resident Of Ward No. 16 Shivnandanpur, Police Station Bishrampur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Smt. Mitusha Prasad W/o Shri Manav Prasad, Resident Of 3rd And 4th Floor, Shyam Chamber, Hirapur Road, Mohababazar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Shri Shahil Singh appears on behalf of Shri Mayank Kumar, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : None. Hon'ble Shri Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J Judgment on Board 18/08/2025 1. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that no cognizance has been taken by the Magistrate as the complaint case has been filed belatedly since the cause of action arose under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138 of the NI Act, 1881. He would further submit that the complaint case has been dismissed prior to the registration under KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2025.08.18 15:57:06 +0530 2 Section 203 of the CrPC against which a Revision would lie under Section 398 of the CrPC/Section 439 of the BNSS and the present case has been wrongly filed under the heading of Acquittal Appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks to withdraw this Appeal with liberty to file a better constituted petition in accordance with law. 2. Considering the submissions put-forth by counsel for the appellant, particularly considering the fact that the complaint case has been dismissed prior to the cognizance stage, this Court is of the opinion that no Acquittal Appeal would lie. Accordingly, the present Appeal is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the appellant to file a better constituted petition in accordance with law. 3. Certified copy of the impugned judgment along with annexures be supplied to counsel for the appellant after retaining xerox copy thereof. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Barve