Bhupendra Kumar Rajak Vs Bhaiya Ram Dhruv — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

Bhupendra Kumar Rajak Vs Bhaiya Ram Dhruv — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty reserved to the appellant to file an appeal within 45 days from this order before the appropriate Court (per the law declared in Celestium Financial regarding the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C.); limitation not to be insisted upon if the appeal is filed within that period.

Issue for consideration

Whether the acquittal appeal preferred under Section 378(4) CrPC should be disposed of with liberty to the appellant to instead avail the remedy of an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, as recognised in Celestium Financial.

Court's answer

Considering the law declared in Celestium Financial, the appeal stands disposed of reserving liberty to the appellant to file an appeal within 45 days from this order before the appropriate Court, in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

If such an appeal is filed before the concerned Court within the time given by this Court, that Court shall not insist upon limitation and shall decide the appeal in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Acquittal Appeal (ACQA No. 33 of 2020, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J., 04/08/2025) preferred under Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 by complainant Bhupendra Kumar Rajak against the judgment dated 06.10.2018 of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Baloda Bazar (C.G.) in Criminal Complaint Case No.13/2018 acquitting Bhaiya Ram Dhruv and M/s Shri Vishnu H. P. Gramin Distributor of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — on learned counsel's submission invoking Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 INSC 804 (Supreme Court, judgment dated 08.04.2025) on the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. — appeal disposed of reserving liberty to the appellant to file an appeal within 45 days from the order before the appropriate Court; if filed within that time, limitation not to be insisted upon and the appeal to be decided in accordance with law.

1

2025:CGHC:38234

NAFR

PRIYANKA VERMA

Digitally signed by PRIYANKA VERMA Date: 2025.08.05 10:41:09 +0530

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

ACQA No. 33 of 2020

1 - Bhupendra Kumar Rajak S/o Shri Vishnu Prasad Rajak, Aged About 45 Years R/o Beside Rajak Printers, Palari, Tahsil Palari, District - Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh

... Appellant

versus

1 - Bhaiya Ram Dhruv S/o Shri Ram Singh Dhruv, Aged About 47 Years

2 - M/s Shri Vishnu H. P. Gramin Distributor, Proprietor Bhaiya Ram Dhruv, Gandhi Chowk, Palari, Tahsil Palari, District Baloda BazarBhatapara Chhattisgarh

... Respondents

For Appellant : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari

Judgment On Board

04/08/2025

2

1. This Acquittal Appeal has been preferred under Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgment dated 06.10.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Baloda Bazar (C.G.) in Criminal Complaint Case No.13/2018, 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. He 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