Sheela Vatyani Vs M/S Sai Sales — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

Sheela Vatyani Vs M/S Sai Sales — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of with liberty to the appellant to withdraw it and prefer a fresh appeal against the acquittal order dated 27/03/2023 before the concerned Sessions Judge under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. within 60 days, with a direction that limitation not be insisted upon; Registry to return the certified copy of the impugned order (Annexure-P/1) and relevant documents after obtaining photocopies and to remit the record to the concerned Court forthwith.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant may be permitted to withdraw this appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. with liberty to prefer an appeal before the concerned Sessions Judge under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 413 BNSS, 2023). +1 more

Court's answer

The Court permitted the appellant to withdraw the appeal, granting liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned acquittal order dated 27/03/2023 before the concerned Sessions Judge within 60 days from receipt of a copy of the order, in view of the law declared by the Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 INSC 804.

Ratio / Principle

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

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Chhattisgarh High Court (Single Bench, Sanjay S. Agrawal J., 10/11/2025), ACQA No. 170 of 2023: Appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. by the complainant against the order dated 27/03/2023 of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur in Criminal Case No.8193/2019 acquitting the respondent(s)/accused of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. Placing reliance on the Supreme Court's decision dated 08/04/2025 in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 INSC 804, on the victim's right to appeal against an acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C., the Court permitted the appellant to withdraw the appeal with liberty to prefer a fresh appeal before the concerned Sessions Judge (proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C., corresponding to Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) within 60 days from receipt of a copy of the order; it clarified that limitation would not be insisted upon if the appeal was filed within that period; the Registry was directed to return the certified copy of the impugned order and relevant documents and remit the record; the appeal was disposed of.

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

ACQA No. 170 of 2023

Sheela Vatyani W/o Shri Hansraj Vatyani Aged About 55 Years Through General Power Of Attorney Kamal Vatyani, Aged 35 Years, S/o Hansraj Vatyani, At Aadarsh Nagar, Mowa, District Raipur (C.G.)

... Appellant

versus

1 - M/s Sai Sales,

2 - Manoj Khemani, Proprietor M/s Sai Sales, S/o Khanchand Khemani, Both at - Gali No. 04, Ravigram Colony, Telibandha, District Raipur (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

For Appellant : Shri Akash Mishra, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Vijay Nagdev, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : None.

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal

Judgment on Board

10/11/2025

Digitally signed NARESH by NARESHKUMAR KUMARKAMDE KAMDEDate:2025.11.11 10:52:25 +0530

This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant under Section 378 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the order dated 27/03/2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur (C.G.) in Criminal Case No.8193/2019, whereby, the Respondent(s)/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.

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

2

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.

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 granting him liberty to prefer the appeal against the impugned order dated 27/03/2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur (C.G.) in Criminal Case No.8193/2019, before the concerned Sessions Judge within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Order accordingly.

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.

Registry shall return the certified copy of the impugned order Annexure-P/1 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.

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/-

( Sanjay S. Agrawal ) JUDGE

Kamde