1 2025:CGHC:29891 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 449 of 2025 1 - M/s. Shree Agro Tech Through Partner And Authorized Signatory, R.N. Mishra, Age- 59 Year S/o Late R.S. Mishra Address- Kh-98/40, Behind Hapy Dhaba, Tatibandh, Raipur (C.G.). (Complainant) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Sakharam Poya S/o Shri Dhanadi Ram Poya Aged About 58 Years Address- Village- Khairkhedan Post- Charama And Tahsil- Charama, District- Kanker (Chhattisgarh) (Accused.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri RN Mishra, petitioner-in-person. For Respondent(s) : None. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board 02/07/2025 1. This petition has been preferred against the judgment of acquittal dated 23.11.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur in Complaint Case No.1611/2017, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 2. Recently in the judgment dated 08.04.2025 rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Celestium Financial vs. A. AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2025.07.03 10:50:15 +0530 2 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. 3. Petitioner submits that the petition may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy. 4. In view of the aforesaid submission and considering the law declared in the matter of Celestium Financial (supra), this petition stands disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to file an appeal within a period of 45 days from this order before the appropriate Court, in accordance with law. It is 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 impugned judgment/order and relevant documents to the petitioner after retaining the photocopy of the same. 6. Accordingly, the CRMP is disposed of. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Barve/Avinash