1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 264 of 2024 1 - Satish Pathak S/o Shri Umashankar Pathak, Aged About 44 Years R/o Jarhagaon, P/s - Jarhagaon, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - Village Panchayat- Rohra Through Its Sarpanch, Janpad Panchayat, Mungeli, Police Station And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Secretary, Village Panchayat Rohra, Janpad Panchayat Mungeli, Police Station And District Mungeli, Chhattisgah. 3 - Chandra Kumar Jogvansh, S/o Sadhua Jogvansh, Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Rohra, Police Station And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Aatma Ram Sahu, S/.O Madhuriya Ram Sahu, Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Rewapara, Post Office Kodvabani, Police Station And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Siddhant Kumar Das, Adv. For Respondents : None. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 28/08/2025 1. This acquittal appeal U/s 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. has been filed against the judgment dated 04.03.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mungeli (C.G.) in Criminal Complaint Case No. 18/2015 whereby, the respondents/accused persons have been acquitted of the charge for commission of offence under Section 138 of N.I. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.08.28 16:58:22 +0530 2 Act. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that recently the Supreme Court has delivered a judgment in the matter of M/s. Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. reported in 2025 INSC 804 holding that the complainant in a complaint filed under section 138 of the Act of 1881 is also a victim as defined in section 2(wa) of Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 2(y) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNSS”). He submits that the Supreme Court has further held that the complainant in a complaint under section 138 of the Act of 1881 can also be entitled to file an appeal under proviso to section 372 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of the BNSS. Learned counsel submits that the case may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy. 3. In view of the aforesaid submission and considering the law declared in the matter of Celestium Financial (supra), this Appeal stands disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the appellant to file an appeal within a period of 60 days from this order before the appropriate Court, in accordance with law. It is further made clear that if such an appeal is filed before the concerned Court within the time given by this Court, it would not insist upon the limitation while deciding the same and will proceed to decide the same in accordance with law. 4. Registry shall return the certified copy of the impugned judgment/order and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining the photocopy of the same. 5. Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) H.L. Sahu Judge