Nemnath Yogi Vs Yashwant Chandravanshi — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Nemnath Yogi Vs Yashwant Chandravanshi — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of permitting withdrawal with liberty to question the acquittal judgment dated 19.03.2021 in appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C.; if the appeal is filed within 30 days, the Sessions Judge is not to insist upon limitation and is to decide the appeal in accordance with law; certified copy and documents to be returned to counsel and record remitted to the concerned Court forthwith.

Issue for consideration

Whether the pending petition may be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to question the legality and propriety of the acquittal judgment dated 19.03.2021 (Criminal Case No.948/2017, JMFC Kawardha) before the Sessions Court under Section 372 of Cr.P.C., in view of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804), and whether limitation may be waived if the appeal is filed within 30 days.

Court's answer

The petition stands disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner questions the impugned judgment of acquittal in appeal within a period of 30 days, the concerned Sessions Judge would not insist upon the limitation while deciding the same and will proceed to decide the appeal in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

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

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (single judge, Sanjay S. Agrawal, J.), order dated 07.08.2025 in CRMP No. 579 of 2021 (Nemnath Yogi v. Yashwant Chandravanshi): during the pendency of the petition, the petitioner prayed for its withdrawal with liberty to question the legality and propriety of the acquittal judgment dated 19.03.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) in Criminal Case No.948/2017, before the learned Sessions Court under Section 372 of Cr.P.C., in view of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 INSC 804. Considering those principles, the Court disposed of the petition with a direction that if the petitioner questions the impugned acquittal judgment in appeal within 30 days, the concerned Sessions Judge would not insist upon limitation and would decide the appeal in accordance with law; the Registry was further directed to return the certified copy of the impugned judgment and relevant documents to counsel after obtaining a photocopy and to remit the record to the concerned Court forthwith.

1

2025:CGHC:39483

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

CRMP No. 579 of 2021

Nemnath Yogi S/o Motinath Yogi Aged About 38 Years R/o Vill. Mohgaon, Police Station Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner

versus

SUNITA GOSWAMI

Digitally signed by SUNITA GOSWAMI Date: 2025.08.07 18:06:46 +0530

Yashwant Chandravanshi S/o Kisunram Chandravanshi Aged About 30 Years R/o Paliguda, Police Station Pipariya, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent

For Petitioner	: Mr. Aadarsh Rajput, Advocate.
For Respondent	: None.

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal

Order on Board

07.08.2025

1 ) During the pendency of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for withdrawal of this petition with liberty to question the legality and propriety of the impugned judgment dated 19.03.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kawardha, District Kabirdham (Kawardha) (C.G.) in Criminal Case No.948/2017, before the learned Sessions Court under Section 372 of Cr.P.C., in view of principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of M/s

2

Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., reported in 2025 INSC 804.

2 ) Having considered the aforesaid submissions of the counsel appearing for the petitioner in the light of the aforesaid principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the above referred matter, the instant petition stands disposed of with a direction that, if the petitioner questions the impugned judgment of acquittal in appeal within a period of 30 days from today, the concerned Sessions Judge would not insist upon the limitation while deciding the same and will proceed to decide the appeal, in accordance with law.

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

4 ) Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

( Sanjay S. Agrawal ) JUDGE

sunita