Sevakdas Manikpuri Vs Smt. Dashoda Manikpuri — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

Sevakdas Manikpuri Vs Smt. Dashoda Manikpuri — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of with permission to the appellant to withdraw it, with liberty to prefer an appeal against the acquittal judgment dated 28/03/2023 before the concerned Sessions Judge within 30 days of receipt of a copy of this order, with a direction that limitation shall not be insisted upon; Registry directed to return the certified copy of the impugned judgment and documents to counsel for the appellant after obtaining photocopies and to remit the record to the concerned Court forthwith.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant/complainant may be permitted to withdraw this appeal under Section 378(4) CrPC (preferred against acquittal under Section 138 NI Act) with liberty to prefer a fresh appeal before the concerned Sessions Judge under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 413 of the BNSS 2023), and whether limitation would bar such appeal.

Court's answer

Considering the law declared by the Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 INSC 804, the appellant was permitted to withdraw this appeal with liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned acquittal judgment dated 28/03/2023 before the concerned Sessions Judge within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Ratio / Principle

If such an appeal is preferred before the concerned Sessions Judge within the time granted by this Court, limitation shall not be insisted upon and the appeal shall be decided in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ACQA No. 149 of 2023 (High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, Sanjay S. Agrawal, J., decided 14/08/2025): Appeal by the complainant under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment of acquittal dated 28/03/2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahasamund (C.G.) in Complaint Case No.1209/2019, acquitting the respondent/accused of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. Placing reliance on the Supreme Court decision dated 08/04/2025 in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 INSC 804, on the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C., the Court permitted the appellant to withdraw the appeal with liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment before the concerned Sessions Judge within 30 days, clarifying that limitation would not be insisted upon if the appeal was filed within that time. Counsel for the respondent stated he would not insist on limitation. Appeal disposed of; Registry directed to return certified copies and remit the record forthwith.

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

ACQA No. 149 of 2023

Sevakdas Manikpuri S/o Shri Niridheen Das Manikpuri, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Ward No.3, Ramrahim Nagar, Mahasamund, Police Station/ Tahsil And District Mahasamund (C.G.). ..........Complainant )

... Appellant

CHANDRAKANT DEWANGAN

versus

Digitally signed by CHANDRAKANT DEWANGAN Date: 2025.08.14 16:02:35 +0530

Smt. Dashoda Manikpuri W/o Shri Santoshdas Manikpuri, R/o Malviya Chawk, Panch Building, Street No.4, House No.162/47, Village, Post And Police Station Durg, Durg Tahsil And District- Durg (C.G.). ......... (Accused)

... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Purnendra Khichariya, Advocate.

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal

Judgment on Board

14/08/2025

1 ) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the judgment of acquittal dated 28/03/2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahasamund (C.G.) in Complaint Case No.1209/2019, whereby, the Respondent/accused has been

2

acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.

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 M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., reported in 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. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits further that the Supreme Court in the said matter has reserved the liberty in favour of the petitioner therein to prefer an appeal in the light of the provisions of Section 372 of the 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 Session Judge under proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. He further submits that the limitation may not come in the way while deciding the appeal on its merits.

3 ) Learned counsel for the respondent submits that in case an appeal is filed, the respondent will not insist upon the limitation.

4 ) 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

3

granting him liberty to prefer the appeal against the impugned judgment dated 28/03/2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahasamund (C.G.) in Complaint Case No.1209/2019, before the concerned Sessions Judge within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Order accordingly.

5 ) It is clarified that if such an appeal is preferred before the concerned Session 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.

6 ) Registry shall return the certified copy of the impugned judgment and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after obtaining the photocopy of the same and, shall remit the record to the concerned Court forthwith.

7 ) Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/- ( Sanjay S. Agrawal ) JUDGE

Chandrakant