1 2025:CGHC:31975 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ACQA No. 89 of 2025 1 - Gautam Jain S/o Shitalchand Jain Aged About 35 Years R/o Bakhshi Marg, Ward No. 8, Khairagarh, Tahsil Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon, Now District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai, Chhattisgarh (Complainant) ... Appellant versus 1 - Roopchand Joshi S/o Dharamdas Joshi Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Dokrabhatha, Post Dokrabhatha, Tahsil Khairagarh District Rajnandgaon, Now District Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai, Chhattisgarh (Accused) ... Respondent For Appellant : Ms. Komal Yadav, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate For Respondent : None Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Judgment On Board 10/07/2025 PRIYANKA VERMA Digitally signed by PRIYANKA VERMA Date: 2025.07.11 13:31:02 +0530 2 1. This Acquittal Appeal has been preferred under Section 419(4) of the BNSS, 2023 against the judgment dated 13.12.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon in Criminal Complaint Case No.855/2022, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 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. She submits that the Appeal may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy. 3. In view of the aforesaid submission and considering the law declared in the matter of Celestium Financial (supra), this Appeal stands disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the appellant to file an appeal within a period of 45 days from 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 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 4. Registry shall return the certified copy of the judgment and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining its photocopy. 5. Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court. 6. Accordingly, the Appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Priyanka