Surekha Patre Vs Dhaneshwar Kurre — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

Surekha Patre Vs Dhaneshwar Kurre — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

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

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the Supreme Court's ruling in Celestium Financial (2025 INSC 804) that a complainant in a Section 138 case is a 'victim' entitled to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 413 BNSS), the present acquittal appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. should be disposed of with liberty to the appellant to pursue that remedy.

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

If such an appeal is filed before the concerned Court within the time given by this Court (60 days), that Court would not insist upon the limitation while deciding the same and will proceed to decide it in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Acquittal appeal (ACQA No. 441 of 2024) under S.378(4) Cr.P.C. by the complainant against the acquittal of the respondent/accused under S.138 N.I. Act (judgment dated 07.04.2022, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, in N.I.A. No. 769/2019). At the outset, on counsel's submission recording the Supreme Court's ruling in M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 INSC 804, that a complainant in a S.138 complaint is a 'victim' under S.2(wa) Cr.P.C. (corresponding to S.2(y) BNSS) entitled to appeal under the proviso to S.372 Cr.P.C. (corresponding to S.413 BNSS), the High Court disposed of the appeal reserving liberty to the appellant to file an appeal before the appropriate Court within 60 days, with an assurance that limitation would not be insisted upon if the appeal is filed within that period. Registry directed to return certified copies (retaining photocopy) and to send the record back to the concerned Court. Merits of the acquittal were not adjudicated.

1

	Digitally signed by SHUBHAM
SHUBHAM SINGH	SINGH RAGHUVANSHI
RAGHUVANSHI	Date: 2026.01.02
	17:09:39 +0530

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

ACQA No. 441 of 2024

Surekha Patre W/o Mithlesh Patre Aged About 33 Years R/o Sai Nagar, Uslapur, Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Presently Residing At Mangla Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

... Appellant

versus

Dhaneshwar Kurre S/o Dwarika Prasad Kurre Aged About 28 Years R/o Kurre Nagar, Karhidih, Police Station Baloda, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.)

... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Suresh Tandan, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. C.P. Lahrey, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Judgment on Board

02/01/2026

1. This acquittal appeal U/s 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. has been f i led against the judgment dated 07.04.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur (C.G.) in N.I.A. No. 769/2019 whereby, the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge for commission of of f ence under Section 138 of N.I.

2

Act.

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that recently the Supreme Court has delivered a judgment in the matter of M/s. Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. reported in 2025 INSC 804 holding that the complainant in a complaint f i led under section 138 of the Act of 1881 is also a victim as def i ned 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 f i le an appeal under proviso to Section 372 of 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.

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 fle an appeal within a period of 60 days from today i before the appropriate Court, in accordance with law. It is further made clear that if such an appeal is f i led 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 certif i ed copy of the impugned judgment/order and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining photocopy of the same.

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

Sd/(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

Shubham