Shashank Bajpai Vs Subhanshu Shukla — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

Shashank Bajpai Vs Subhanshu Shukla — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of with liberty reserved to the appellant to file an appeal within 60 days from receipt of a copy of the order before the appropriate Court in accordance with law; if filed within that period, the concerned Court is not to insist upon limitation and is to decide it in accordance with law; Registry directed to return the certified copy of the impugned judgment/order and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant (retaining photocopy) and to send the record back to the concerned Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the law declared in Celestium Financial (2025 INSC 804) that a complainant under S.138 of the 1881 Act is a "victim" entitled to appeal under the proviso to S.372 Cr.P.C. / S.413 BNSS, the present acquittal appeal under S.419(4) BNSS should be disposed of with liberty to the appellant to avail that remedy.

Court's answer

Considering the law declared in Celestium Financial (supra), the acquittal appeal stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the appellant to file an appeal within 60 days from receipt of a copy of this order before the appropriate Court, in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

If such an appeal is filed before the concerned Court within the 60-day period given by this Court, that Court shall not insist upon limitation and shall proceed to decide the appeal in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Acquittal appeal (ACQA No. 84 of 2024) under Section 419(4) BNSS filed by Shashank Bajpai (proprietor, S.S. Finance and Insurance), the complainant, against the judgment dated 12.07.2023 of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bemetara, dismissing his complaint under Section 138, Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (Complaint Case No. 2045/2021) and thereby acquitting Subhanshu Shukla. Counsel invoked the Supreme Court decision in M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 INSC 804, that a complainant under Section 138 of the 1881 Act is a "victim" under Section 2(wa) Cr.P.C. / Section 2(y) BNSS and may appeal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. / Section 413 BNSS. Relying on that law, the High Court (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal, J.; order dated 02.09.2025) disposed of the appeal, reserving liberty to file the appropriate appeal within 60 days, and directed that the concerned Court, if the appeal is filed within that period, shall not insist upon limitation and shall decide it in accordance with law. Registry directed to return certified copies to counsel and to send the record back to the concerned Court.

1

2025:CGHC:44778

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

ACQA No. 84 of 2024

Shashank Bajpai Propritor S. S. Finance and Insurance S/o - Anil Bajpai Aged About 33 Years R/o- Opposite City Kotwali, Bemetara, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner

versus

Subhanshu Shukla S/o Ramakant Shukla Aged About 32 Years R/o Shivaji Ward, Raipur Road, Shukla Aara Mill, Mungeli Tehsil And District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent

For the appellant : Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate For the respondent : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal)

(Order on Board)

02.09.2025

1. This acquittal appeal U/s 419(4) of BNSS has been filed against the judgment dated 12.07.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bemetara (C.G.) in Complaint Case No. 2045/2021 whereby the complaint u/s 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 filed by the complainant has been dismissed, which has effect of acquittal of the respondent.

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that recently

2

the Supreme Court has rendered the decision in M/s. Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. reported in 2025 INSC 804 holding that the complainant in a complaint filed under section 138 of the Act of 1881 is also a victim as defined in section 2(wa) of Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 2(y) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNSS”). He submits that the Supreme Court has further held that the complainant in a complaint under section 138 of the Act of 1881 can also be entitled to file an appeal under proviso to section 372 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of the BNSS. Learned counsel submits that the case may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy of appeal.

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 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy 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.

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

5. Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court.

Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

Rao