1 2025:CGHC:50423 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 1 of 2024 Sunil Kumar Agarwal S/o Late Shiv Kumar Agrawal Aged About 53 Years R/o Bharatmata Chowk, Ganj Line, Rajnandgaon, Tahsil and District- Rajnandgaon, Civil and Revenue District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus Ravi Nagwani S/o Shri Rajesh Nagwani R/o Chikhli, Ward No. 8, Khairagarh Road, Rajnandgaon, Tah. and Distt. Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh., ... Respondent For the appellant : Mr. Dinesh Yadav, Advocate, on behalf of Mr. Aditya Bharadwaj, Advocate For the respondent : Mr. Kripesh Kela, Advocate, on behalf of Mr. Rakesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 09.10.2025 1. This acquittal appeal u/s 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed against the judgment dated 02.08.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajnandgaon in Criminal Complaint Case No. 274/2013 whereby, respondent/ accused was acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that in view of the recent decision of the Supreme Court rendered in M/s. Celestium ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.10.10 13:33:58 +0530 2 Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804 wherein it has been held that the complainant in a complaint filed under section 138 of the Act of 1881 is also a victim as defined in section 2(wa) of Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 2(y) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNSS”) and thus the said complainant can also be entitled to file an appeal under proviso to section 372 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of the BNSS, the instant case may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy of appeal. 3. Having considered the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the law laid down in case of Celestium Financial (supra), this Appeal is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the appellant to file an appeal within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy 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. 4. Registry shall return the certified copy of the impugned judgment/order and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining the photocopy of the same. 5. Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao