1 2025:CGHC:25462 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 1026 of 2024 1 - Pushpendra Kumar Goyal S/o. Shri Budhram Goyal Aged About 41 Years Occupation - Business, R/o. Village - Kudekela, Thana And Tahsil - Dharamjaygarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) (Complainant) --- Appellant versus 1 - Manoj Kumar Sahu S/o. Shri Suklal Sahu R/o. Village - Harradih, Tahsil - Tamnar, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) --- Respondent ACQA No. 1012 of 2024 1 - Pushpendra Kumar Goyal S/o Shri Budhram Goyal Aged About 41 Years Occupation Business, R/o Village- Kudekela, Thana And Tahsil- Dharamjaygarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh (Complainant) ---Appellant Versus 1 - Manoj Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Suklal Sahu R/o Village- Harradih, Tahsil- Tamnar, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Kumar Patel, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. A.N. Bhakta and Mr. Vivek Bhakta, Advocates PRIYANKA VERMA Digitally signed by PRIYANKA VERMA Date: 2025.06.18 17:20:50 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board 18/06/2025 1. These Acquittal Appeals have been preferred under Section 419(4) of the BNSS, 2023 against the orders dated 09.07.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dharamjaygarh, District Raigarh in Complaint Case Nos.21/2017 & 27/2017, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. 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 these Appeals may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy. 3. Counsel for the other side would not oppose the aforesaid prayer. 4. In view of the aforesaid submission and considering the law declared in the matter of Celestium Financial (supra), these Appeals stands disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the appellant to file an appeal 3 within a period of 30 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. 5. Registry shall return the certified copy of the judgment(s) and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining its photocopy. 6. Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court. 7. Accordingly, both the Appeals are disposed of. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Priyanka