Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010246352025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.L.P./51/2025 SRI DIBAKAR BARMAN SON OF LATE GUDARAM BARMAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- PIPLIBARI TENGABARI MOUZA- KHETRI DHARMAPUR P.S. BELSOR DISTRICTNALBARI ASSAM PIN-781338 VERSUS SRI NIRMAL TALUKDAR SON OF LATE GIRINDRA NATH TALUKDAR RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- PIPLIBARITENGABARI MOUZA- KHETRI DHARMAPUR P.S. BELSOR DISTRICTNALBARI ASSAM PIN-781338 ------------ Advocate for : MR. P S DEKA Advocate for : appearing for SRI NIRMAL TALUKDAR Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER 23.03.2026 Heard Mr. B.K. Bhagawati, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 419(4) of Cr.P.C, 1973 (as amended up to date) for grant of Special Leave to appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 08.08.2025 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalbari in N.I. Act Case No.53/2019, acquitting the accused person from the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 3. The petitioner herein was the complainant as well as the victim in the case referred to above. The learned Trial Court on conclusion of the proceedings acquitted the accused vide judgment and order dated 08.08.2025. 4. The petitioner as appellant has preferred the accompanying Criminal Appeal against the aforesaid judgment. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal L.P. No.34/2025 vide order dated 04.08.2025 has held as follows : “……… 5. In a recent decision in Celestium Financial vs. A Gnanasekaran Etc, 2025 INSC 804, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has framed the following questions :- 2.1. The central issue arising for adjudication in the instant appeals is, whether an appeal would be maintainable under the proviso to Section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 [for short, ‘Cr.PC’] against an Page No.# 3/4 order of acquittal passed in a case instituted upon a private complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [for short, ‘the Act’], by treating the complainant in such a proceeding as a victim within the meaning ascribed to the term under Section 2 [wa] of the Cr.PC. 6. Answering the question, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in paragraph 10 of the said judgment has held that the victim of offence has the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, irrespective of whether he is a complainant or not. Even if the victim of an offence is a complainant, he can still proceed under the proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to sub-section [4] of Section 378 of the CrPC. 7. The provisions of Section 413 and Section 419[4] of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [‘the BNSS’] are pari-materia to the provisions of Section 372 and Section 378[4] of the CrPC. 8. Therefore, the petitioner herein has the option of preferring an appeal under the proviso to Section 413 of the BNSS.” 5. Another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal L.P. No.38/2024 vide order dated 15.10.2025 has concurred with the aforesaid view. 6. Section 372 Cr.P.C provides as follows : “No appeal to lie unless otherwise provided.-No appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court except as provided for by this Code by any other law for the time being in force: Provided that the victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against any order passed by the Court acquitting the accused or convicting for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation, and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court. 7. From the above proviso, it is evident that an appeal against acquittal will lie before the same Court against which an appeal against a conviction in the Page No.# 4/4 same case would have lied, which in the present case is a Court of Sessions, as the impugned order has been passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. 8. Accordingly, this Criminal L.P. Case No.51/2025 is disposed of with the observation that the petitioner is at liberty to approach the jurisdictional Court of Sessions against the impugned judgment and order by way of an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C/Section 413 of BNSS. 9. It is also noted that the petitioner has preferred the connected appeal before this Court on the bona fide assumption that the appeal lies before the present forum in view of the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 15.10.2025 in Criminal L.P. No.38/2024 and hence it appears that the petitioner is prima facie entitled to the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act. 10. With the aforesaid observations, the Criminal L.P. Case No.51/2025 stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant