1 2025:CGHC:44588 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 299 of 2022 Vikas Keswani S/o Shri Devidas Keswani, Aged About 41 Years, R/o M- 35, Rajiv Nagar, Raipur District Raipur...............(Original Complainant), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Appellant(s) versus Sulabh Israni S/o Shri Shankar Lal Israni, aged about 30 years, Proprietor- Israni Hardware Stores, Infront of Raj Talkies, Bombay Market, Raipur (C.G.) R/o House No. 3, Street No. 4, Fafadih, Raipur District Raipur (CG)..........(Original Accused)., --- Respondent(s) ACQA No. 304 of 2022 Vikas Keswani S/o Shri Devidas Keswani, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of M- 35, Rajiv Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) (Original Complainant) ---Appellant(s) Versus Sulabh Israni S/o Shri Shankar Lal Israni Aged About 30 Years Proprietor Israni Hardware Stores, Infront Of Raj Talkies, Bombay Market, Raipur Chhattisgarh. Residing At House No. 3, Street No. 4, Fafadih, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Original Accused) --- Respondent(s) SHYNA AJAY Digitally signed by SHYNA AJAY DN: cn=SHYNA AJAY, o=PERSONAL, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN 2 ACQA No. 305 of 2022 Vikas Keswani S/o Shri Devidas Keswani, Aged About 41 Years R/o M-35, Rajiv Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Original Complainant) ---Appellant(s) Versus Sulabh Israni S/o Shri Shankar Lal Israni, Aged About 30 Years Proprietor - Israni Hardware Stores, Infront of Raj Talkies, Bombay Market, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. R/o House No. 3, Street No. 4, Fafadih, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Original Accused) --- Respondent(s) ACQA No. 308 of 2022 Vikas Keswani S/o Shri Devidas Keswani, Aged About 41 Years, R/o M-35, Rajiv Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Original Complainant) ---Appellant(s) Versus Sulabh Israni S/o Shri Shankar Lal Israni, Aged About 30 Years Proprietor - Israni Hardware Stores, Infront of Raj Talkies, Bombay Market, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. R/o House No. 3, Street No. 4, Fafadih, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Original Accused) --- Respondent(s) ACQA No. 946 of 2024 Vikas Keswani S/o Shri Devidas Keswani Aged About 41 Years Resident Of M-35, Rajiv Nagar, Raipur District- Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Original Complainant) ---Appellant (s) Versus 3 Sulabh Israni S/o Shri Shankar Lal Israni Aged About 30 Years Proprietor-Israni Hardware Stores, Infront Of Raj Talkies, Bombay Market, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Residing At House No.3, Street No.4, Fafadih, Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh. (Original Accused) --- Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Abhijeet Mishra, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Abhishek Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. DK Gwalre, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Judgment On Board 02/09/2025 1. Heard. 2. ACQA No. 299 of 2022 has been preferred against the judgment of acquittal dated 30.12.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur (CG) in Criminal Case No.3/2017, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 3. ACQA No. 304 of 2022 has been preferred against the judgment of acquittal dated 30.12.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur (CG) in Criminal Case No.2/2017, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 4 4. ACQA No. 305 of 2022 has been preferred against the judgment of acquittal dated 30.12.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur (CG) in Criminal Case No.5/2017, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 5. ACQA No. 308 of 2022 has been preferred against the judgment of acquittal dated 30.12.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur (CG) in Criminal Case No.4/2017, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 6. ACQA No. 946 of 2024 has been preferred against the judgment of acquittal dated 30.12.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur (CG) in Criminal Case No.1/2017, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 7. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that recently in the judgment dated 08.04.2025 rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 INSC 804, right to file appeal under proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. was discussed and it was held that the victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against any order passed by the Court acquitting the accused and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court. He submits that the 5 Appeals may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy. 8. Counsel for the other side would not oppose the aforesaid prayer. 9. In view of the aforesaid submission and considering the law declared in the matter of Celestium Financial (supra), these Appeals stand disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the appellant to file an appeal within a period of 45 days from the date of passing of 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. 10.Registry shall return the certified copy of the impugned judgment(s) and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining a photocopy of the same. 11.Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court. 12.Accordingly, the Appeals are disposed of. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Shyna