1 2025:CGHC:54688 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 804 of 2019 Smt. Sarika Sanghi Wd/o Shri Alok Sanghi Aged About 42 Years R/o D-203, Ashok Heights, Mova, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Through Attorney Shiv Kumar Agrawal S/o Late Shri Ratanlal Agrawal Aged About 54 Years, R/o Ashoka Heights, Mova, Raipur Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Navjyoti Industries Through Proprietor Harishchand Gehani S/o Shri Gopichand Gehani Khokhali Bhatapara, District- Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, (C.G.) 2 - Harishchand Gehani S/o Shri Gopichand Gehani Aged About 60 Years R/o Sant Gelaram Colony, Mata Devalaya Ward, Bhatapara, District- Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara (C.G.) 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title, as taken from CIS) For Appellant : Mr. Keshav Dewanagn, Advocate. For Respondents No. 1 & 2 For Respondent No. 3 : None present Ms. Prabha Sharma, Panel Lawyer. 2 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 10/11/2025 1. This appeal under Section 378 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for brevity “Cr.P.C.”) has been filed by the appellant / complainant challenging the judgment dated 05.08.2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) in Complaint Case No. 2104/2018 (Smt. Sarika Sanghi & others vs. Navjyoti Industries & another) , whereby the respondents No. 1 & 2 /accused have been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short “the NI Act”). The appeal was filed along with an application under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. for grant of leave to appeal against the impugned judgment, which was allowed by this Court vide order dated 04.12.2019. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that recently in the judgment dated 08.04.2025 rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Celestium Financial vs. A. 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. He further submits that the case may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent would not oppose the aforesaid submission. 3 4. In view of the aforesaid submission and considering the law declared in the matter of Celestium Financial (supra), this appeal is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the appellant to file an appeal within a period of 45 days from the date of 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 stipulated period 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 and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining xerox copy of the same. 6. Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court. 7. Accordingly, the Acquittal Appeal stands disposed of. 8. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.11.13 18:20:26 +0530 4