NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Cr.M.P. No. 3867 of 2025 Smt. Rekha Gupta W/o Vijay Gupta Aged About 47 Years R/o Kali Ward Kawardha, Police Station And Tahsil - Kawardha, District - Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner Versus Balaram Chandravanshi S/o Lahariram Chandravanshi Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Saihamalgi, Police Station Kunda, Out Post - Damapur, Tahsil Pandariya, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh --- Respondent For Petitioner : Shri Ujjawal Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent : Shri Rishabh Deo Shukla, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 15 /05/2026 1. This Cr.M.P. has been filed for recalling the judgment dated 22.7.2025 passed in Ac.Q.A. No.555 of 2024. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that Ac.Q.A. No.555 of 2024 for leave to appeal was filed by applicant/petitioner Smt. Rekha Gupta against the judgment of acquittal dated 11.01.2023 passed in Criminal Case No.138 of 2020 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.). He further submits that inadvertently when the said acquittal appeal came up for hearing before this Court, a submission was made that in light of a judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Celestium Financial v. A.Gnanasekaran Etc., reported in (2025) INSC 804, an appeal would lie against the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) in Criminal Complaint Case No.138 of 2020 by which the accused/respondent was convicted for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments ASHISH TIWARI Digitally signed by ASHISH TIWARI Date: 2026.05.20 16:59:50 +0530 -2- Act, 1881. This Court while disposing of the said Cr.M.P. passed the following order: “8.In the light of the submissions made above and also keeping in view the law laid down by the Supreme Court referred to above, this Court is inclined to permit the appellant to withdraw this application by granting him liberty to prefer the appeal against the impugned judgment dated 11.01.2023 before the concerned Sessions Judge within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Order accordingly. It is clarified that if such an appeal is filed 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.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that due to bona fide mistake the submission was made. In fact, no appeal would be maintainable before the learned Additional Sessions Judge as the appeal has already been preferred by the accused/respondent which was allowed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Complaint Case No.138 of 2020. Therefore, the order passed in the said Acquittal Appeal may be recalled. 4. Be that as it may, from perusal of the material available it appears that this Court while deciding the aforesaid Cr.M.P. has permitted the applicant to file an appeal, but, such appeal would not be maintainable. -3- 5. In view of the above, the order dated 22.7.2025 passed in Acq.A. No. 555/2024 is recalled and the said Acquittal Appeal is restored to its original number. 6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after passing of the order dated 22.7.2025 passed in Acq.A. No.555 of 2024, certified copy of the impugned order dated 11.01.2023 has already been taken back by the applicant. Thus, he may be permitted to place the said certified copy on the record of Acq.A. No.555 of 2024. 7. Permission is granted. 8. The instant Cr.M.P. is disposed of. Sd/- -Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge -/ Ashish