Disposed¶21

Asme Dewangan v. Vinod Soni

Chhattisgarh HC15 Sept 2025CRMP/717/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special leave to appeal converted into acquittal appeal; Section 419(4) BNSS / Section 378(4) CrPC; Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act acquittal; complainant as 'victim' under section 2(wa) CrPC / Section 2(y) BNSS; statutory appeal under proviso to Section 372 CrPC / Section 413 BNSS; reliance on Celestium Financial, 2025 INSC 804; 60-day window with limitation not to be insisted upon; CRMP No. 717 of 2024; High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal; Rajnandgaon; cheque dishonour acquittal appeal.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of in terms of an acquittal appeal; liberty reserved to the petitioner to file an appeal within 60 days of receipt of a copy of this order before the appropriate Court, with the concerned Court directed not to insist upon limitation if the appeal is filed within that period.

Asme Dewangan Vs Vinod Soni — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the petition under Section 378(4) CrPC / Section 419(4) BNSS seeking special leave to appeal against the acquittal in the Section 138 NI Act complaint can be disposed of in terms of an acquittal appeal, special leave being unnecessary since the complainant is a victim with a statutory right of appeal. +1 more

¶18

Court's answer

Having considered the submission of learned counsel, this Court disposed of the petition under Section 419(4) BNSS in terms of an acquittal appeal, it being no longer necessary to seek special leave to appeal since the complainant is a victim with statutory right of appeal under the proviso to Section 413 BNSS (Section 372 CrPC).

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Considering the law declared in Celestium Financial (supra) — that a Section 138 complainant is a victim entitled to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC / Section 413 BNSS — this Court disposed of the Cr.M.P./Appeal reserving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal within 60 days of receipt of a copy of the order before the appropriate Court, in accordance with law.

¶21

Key takeaways

If the appeal is filed before the concerned Court within the 60-day period allowed by this Court, that Court shall not insist upon limitation while deciding the appeal and shall proceed to decide it in accordance with law.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Complainant's petition under S. 378(4) CrPC / S. 419(4) BNSS seeking special leave to appeal against acquittal under S. 138 NI Act (Criminal Case No. 1314/2017, JMFC Rajnandgaon, judgment dt. 10.01.2024) disposed of in terms of an acquittal appeal, considering the law declared in M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 INSC 804, that a Section 138 complainant is a 'victim' entitled to appeal under the proviso to S. 372 CrPC / S. 413 BNSS; liberty reserved to file the appeal within 60 days, and the concerned Court directed not to insist upon limitation if the appeal is filed within that time.

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

CRMP No. 717 of 2024

¶5

1 - Asme Dewangan S/o Dukhitram Dewangan Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Sukuldaihan, Post Dhangaon, Tahsil And District Rajnandgoan Chhattisgarh.

¶6

... Petitioner

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - Vinod Soni S/o Shri Sunil Soni, Aged About 34 Years R/o House No. 1/T Ward No. 10, Station Para Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. At Present R/o Village Ruvantala, Post Dangaon, Tahsil Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Ramteke, Advocate. For Respondent : Not noticed.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶12

Order on Board

¶13

16/09/2025

¶14

1. The complainant/petitioner has filed this petition under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. (corresponding Section 419(4) of BNSS) seeking grant of leave to appeal. The prayer made in the acquittal appeal filed along-with the petition shows that he seeks a direction to set aside the impugned judgment dated 10.01.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajnandgaon, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) in Criminal Case No. 1314/2017 by which the

¶15

Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.09.17 10:36:16 +0530

¶16

¶17

respondent/accused was acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶18

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the complaint filed u/s section 138 of NI Act before the trial Court stood dismissed, the petition filed u/s 419(4) of BNSS can be disposed of in terms of an acquittal appeal and it is no longer necessary to seek special leave to appeal, because the complainant is considered victim and has statutory right to appeal under the proviso to Section 413 BNSS (Section 372 CrPC).

¶19

3. Having considered the submission made by learned counsel, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition in terms of acquittal appeal.

¶20

4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the recent decision of the Supreme Court rendered in M/s. Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. reported in 2025 INSC 804 wherein it has been held 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”) and the said complaint can also be entitled to file an appeal under proviso to section 372 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of the BNSS , therefore, the case may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy of appeal.

¶21

5. In view of the aforesaid submission and considering the law declared in the matter of Celestium Financial (supra), this Cr.M.P/Appeal is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner 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

¶22

¶23

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.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

Sd/(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶27

H.L. Sahu

Asme Dewangan v. Vinod Soni

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asme Dewangan v. Vinod Soni

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jugeshwar Seth Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

State of Chhattisgarh Vs a

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Rajesh Kumar

Arun Thakur Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Smt. v. Jagdishwari Vs Smt. G. Vijaylakshmi

Sudhir Singh Thakur Vs Nilesh Parekh