Disposed¶23

Ramswaroop Yadu v. Mangal Choudhary

Chhattisgarh HC12 Aug 2025ACQA/145/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

ACQA No. 145 of 2020, Chhattisgarh High Court (Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J.), 13.08.2025: acquittal appeal under S.138 NI Act disposed of in view of Celestium Financial, 2025 INSC 804; liberty reserved to complainant/appellant to invoke proviso to S.372 Cr.P.C.; 45-day window; limitation not to be insisted upon; NAFR.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the appellant to file an appeal before the appropriate Court within 45 days from the date of the order; the concerned Court shall not insist upon limitation if the appeal is filed within that time. Registry to return certified copies and send back the record. ¶23

Ramswaroop Yadu Vs Mangal Choudhary — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=CHATTISGARH, c=IN Date: 2025.08.13 16:52:36 +0530

¶3

2025:CGHC:40700

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

ACQA No. 145 of 2020

¶7

Ramswaroop Yadu Son Of Late Buturam Yadu Aged About 65 Years Resident Of B/5, Flat - 12, Housing Green Valley, Complex, Junwani Bhilai, Tehsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant.

¶8

versus

¶9

Mangal Choudhary Son Of Rambujharat Choudhary Aged About 28 Years Resident Of S.K. Coaching Classes, Santoshi-Para, Camp-2, Bhilai, Ward No. 25, Chawani, Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Respondent.

¶11

For Appellant : Mr. Amit Nayak, Adv on behalf of Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Advocate.

¶12

SB : Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari

¶13

Judgment on Board

¶14

13.08.2025

¶15

The appellant has filed this acquittal appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 11.12.2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg in Complaint Case No.10872/2017, whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, “ the NI Act ”).

¶16

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,

¶17

¶18

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 submits that the case may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy.

¶19

Learned counsel for the respondent would not oppose the aforesaid prayer.

¶20

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 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 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.

¶21

Registry shall return the certified copy of the order/judgment and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining its photocopy.

¶22

Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court.

¶23

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of .

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari)

¶26

Ajay/Avinash

Ramswaroop Yadu v. Mangal Choudhary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramswaroop Yadu v. Mangal Choudhary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Smt. Uma Ram Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Kamlesh Dedhiya Vs Shri Nasir Khan

Smt. Kirti Kurian Vs Ajay Singh

M/S R. B. Construction and Co. Vs Narendra Shah

Nirmal Chand Kothari Vs Kulendra Sharma

Sushil Kumar Sahu Vs Smt. Ful Bai Deep