1 2025:CGHC:56942 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 81 of 2020 Shahzade Ahmad S/o Abdul Hamid Aged About 50 Years R/o Afroz Badi, Police Station- Moudha Para, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus Vasudev Keshwani Profession- Business, R/o Proprietor Bharat Boot House, Nagar Palika Complex, Makai Chowk, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent {Cause title, as taken from Case Information System} For Appellant : Ms. Swati Rani Saraf, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Devershi Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Anmol Verma, Adv. on behalf of Mr. Tridib Bhattacharya, Advocate. {Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 24/11/2025 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 27.12.2019 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) in Criminal Complaint Case No. 8246 / 2011 (Shri Sahjade Ahmed vs. Shri Vasudev Keshwani), 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 2 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 31.01.2020. 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. 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. 3 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 KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.12.08 11:40:41 +0530