1 2025:CGHC:25344 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 34 of 2022 Jasvindar Singh Dale S/o Shri Navrang Dale, Aged About 38 Years R/o House No. A-14/6, Sector-3, Udsa Society, Tatibandh, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus Manpreet Singh S/o Shri Surendra Singh, Aged About 23 Years R/o House No. R-11, Rotary Nagar, Tatibandh, Police Station Amanaka, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Virendra Veram, Advocate For Respondent : None, though served. Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justic e Sanjay S. Agrawal Order on Board 18/06/2025 1. The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant/ Complainant against the Judgment dated 27.12.2021, passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, in Complaint Case No.610/2020 whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2025.06.18 17:57:25 +0530 2 2. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that recently in the Judgment dated 08.04.2025 rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. reported in 2025 INSC 804, right to prefer an appeal under proviso to Section 372 of 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. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits further that the Supreme Court in the aforesaid matter has reserved the liberty in favour of the Petitioner therein to prefer an appeal in the light of the provisions prescribed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. and therefore, in the instant case also the appellant may be permitted to withdraw this appeal with liberty to prefer an appeal before the concerned Sessions Judge under proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhit, 2023. He further submits that the limitation may not come in the way while deciding the appeal on its own merits. 4. No one appears on behalf of the respondent, though the notice of this appeal is served upon him. 5. In the light of the submissions made herein-above and considering the law declared by the Supreme Court in the said matter, this Court is inclined to permit the appellant to withdraw this appeal by granting him liberty to prefer the appeal against the impugned Judgment dated 3 27.12.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, in Complaint Case No.610/2020 before the concerned Sessions Judge within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Order accordingly. 6. It is clarified that if such an appeal is preferred before the concerned Sessions 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. 7. Registry shall return the certified copy of the impugned Judgment to counsel for the Appellant after retaining the photocopy of the same and, shall remit the record to the concerned Court forthwith. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed off. Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge Arpan