1 2025:CGHC:43623 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 748 of 2019 1 - Ajay Kumar Agrawal S/o Brijmohan Agrawal Aged About 37 Years Proprietor Of Ajay Tractor, R/o Danipara, Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Nand Kumar Yadav S/o Late Chandroram Yadav, R/o Village Ghughri, (Kadamtoli) Tahsil Bagicha, Police Station Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Navneet Kumar Yadav appears on behalf of Mr. Akath Kumar Yadav, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Sourabh Burman appears on behalf of Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Judgment On Board 28/08/2025 PRIYANKA VERMA Digitally signed by PRIYANKA VERMA Date: 2025.08.28 16:47:16 +0530 2 1. This Acquittal Appeal has been preferred under Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment dated 31.03.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raigarh in Complaint Case No.3372/2013, 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. Learned counsel submits that the Appeal 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), this Appeal stands disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the appellant to file an appeal within a period of 45 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. 3 5. Registry shall return the certified copy of the judgment 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, the Appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Avinash/Priyanka