1 2026:CGHC:5222 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 303 of 2026 Sandeep Pandey S/o Vinod Kumar Pandey Aged About 40 Years Resident Of L/4, Vinoba Nagar Bilaspur Tahsil And District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, ... Petitioner versus M/s. Shivam Builders And Developers Through Partner- Dr. I.D. Kalwani (Died) Through Vishal Kalwani Through- Vishal Kalwani S/o Late I.D. Kalwani Aged About 46 Years, Resident Of Saket Apartment Agrasen Chowk, P.S. Civil Line Tahsil District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Pawan Ku. Kashyap, Advocate. For Respondent : Not noticed Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 30/01/ 2026 1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 against the order dated 01.12.2025 passed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.01.31 17:37:12 +0530 2 learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) in CRR No.122/2023, arising out of order dated 04.08.2023 passed by learned JMFC Bilaspur (C.G.) in Criminal Complainant Case No.59/2016. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the accused/petitioner, a medical representative, deceived complainant I.D. Kalwani (now deceased) into investing in a business venture, executing a partnership deed on 01-12-2006. The accused misappropriated funds, forged documents, and altered bank accounts, withdrawing 3,50,00,000/- (Three ₹ Crores Fifty Lakhs) without accounting for the expenses. The trial Court took cognizance of the offence under Sections 406, 420, 467, and 471 IPC and allowed the complaint case filed by ID Kalwani. After the death of ID Kalwani, his legal heirs were substituted as complainants vide order dated 04.08.2023. Being aggrieved by the said order, the Petitioner filed CRR No.122/2023 before the learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) and vide impugned order dated 01.12.2025, learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge affirmed the order of learned JMFC and dismissed the revision of the Petitioner. Hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that both the Courts below have committed grave error to 3 appreciating the material facts and evidence on record and passed the erroneous orders, which are liable to be set- aside. 4. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and perused the documents available on record. 5. The complaint case was a warrant case, which was at the stage of pre-charge evidence at the time of the death of the original complainant, I.D. Kalwani. Warrant cases do not automatically terminate upon the death of the complainant. The legal position has been clarified in paragraphs 10 to 14 of the order of learned Revisional Court, and the Trial Court's order was found to be correct. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the material available on record, I do not see any illegality or perversity in the impugned order that warrants interference with the order. 7. Accordingly, the instant petition is hereby dismissed at motion stage itself. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham