1 2025:CGHC:33324 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 318 of 2023 Velji Bhai Patel S/o. Late Shri Daya Bhai Patel, Aged About 52 Years R/o H. No.- D-2, Sector-2, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, Tehsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Complainant) ... Appellant versus Shri Vitthal Ghanshyam Ashtankar S/o. Ghanshyam Ashtankar, Aged About 45 Years R/o Anjaniya Builders And Developers, Second Floor, Business Plaza, Central Bazar Road, Lokmat Chowk, Ramdes Peth, Nagpur, District- Nagpur, Maharashtra (Accused) .. Respondent For Appellant : Shri Ujjwal Agrawal, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Siddharth Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent : None SB: Hon'ble Shri Justic e Sanjay S. Agrawal Judgment on Board 16/07/2025 1) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the judgment of acquittal dated 27.07.2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur (C.G.) in Complaint Case No.9115/ 2012, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. SUNITA GOSWAMI Digitally signed by SUNITA GOSWAMI Date: 2025.07.16 17:53:52 +0530 2 2) At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that recently, in the judgment dated 08.04.2025, rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the matter of Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., reported in 2025 INSC 804, right to prefer an appeal under the 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. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits further that the Supreme Court in the said matter has reserved the liberty in favour of the petitioner therein to prefer an appeal in the light of the provisions of Section 372 of the Cr.P.C, and, therefore, in the instant case also the appellant may be permitted to withdraw this appeal with liberty to prefer an appeal before the concerned Session Court under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. He further submits that the limitation may not come in the way while deciding the appeal on its own merits. 3) In the light of the submissions made herein-above and keeping in view the law laid down by the Supreme Court referred herein- above, this Court is inclined to permit the appellant to withdraw this appeal by granting him liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment dated 27.07.2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur (C.G.) in Complaint Case No.9115/ 3 2012 before the concerned Sessions Judge within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. 4) It is clarified that if such an appeal is preferred before the concerned Session Judge 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 impugned judgment to counsel for the appellant after retaining the photocopy of the same and, shall remit the record to the concerned trial court forthwith. 6) Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. Sd/-/--- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge sunita