1 2025:CGHC:57609 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1433 of 2025 1 - Sunil Kumar Jain S/o Late Bhanwarlal Jain, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Ward No. 15, Ramnagar, Doundilohara, Tehsil Doundilohara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - Dheeraj Kumar Yadav S/o Sunder Singh Yadav, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Bhendi, Tehsil Doundilohara, P.S. Doundilohara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr Vidya Bhushan Soni, Advocate. For Respondent : Not noticed. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 26/11/2025 1. Heard on I.A. No. 01/2025, which is an application for seeking condonation of delay in filing of special leave to appeal. 2. Upon due consideration and for the reasons stated in the application, I.A. No. 01/2025 is allowed and the delay of 7 days in filing the instant petition is hereby condoned. 3. Also heard on admission. 4. Admit. SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.11.26 16:43:01 +0530 2 5. The complainant/petitioner has filed this petition under section 419(4) of BNSS (corresponding to Section 378 CrPC) seeking grant of leave to appeal. The prayer made in the acquittal appeal filed along-with the petition shows that he seeks a direction to set aside the impugned judgment dated 16.01.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Doundilohara, District-Balod (C.G.) in Complaint Case No. 846/2023 by which the respondent/accused was acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the complaint filed u/s section 138 of NI Act before the trial Court stood dismissed, the petition filed u/s 419(4) of BNSS can be disposed of in terms of an acquittal appeal and it is no longer necessary to seek special leave to appeal, because the complainant is considered victim and has statutory right to appeal under the proviso to Section 413 BNSS (Section 372 CrPC). 7. Having considered the submission made by learned counsel, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition in terms of acquittal appeal. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submits that in view of the recent decision of the Supreme Court rendered in M/s. Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. reported in 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 the said complaint can also be entitled to file an appeal under proviso to section 372 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of the BNSS, therefore, the case may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy of appeal. 3 9. 3 9. In view of the aforesaid submission and considering the law declared in the matter of Celestium Financial (supra), this Cr.M.P/Appeal is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the appellant to file an appeal within a period of 60 days 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/order and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining the photocopy of the same. 11. Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.