Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Shahzade Ahmed Vs Vasudev Keshwani — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

Home
Chhattisgarh HC
2026
Shahzade Ahmed Vs Vasudev KeshwaniShahzade Ahmed v. Vasudev Keshwani

Disposed¶24

Shahzade Ahmed v. Vasudev Keshwani

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Acquittal of accused under Section 138

Chhattisgarh HC27 Jan 2026CRMP/2618/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRMP No. 2618 of 2024, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, decided 28/01/2026 by Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal. Shahzade Ahmed v. Vasudev Keshwani. Petition under Section 419(4) BNSS 2023 against acquittal dated 30.04.2024 by JMFC Raipur in Criminal Complaint Case No. 2044/2015 under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act 1881. Disposed of with liberty to file appeal within 45 days, relying on Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 INSC 804 (victim's right of appeal against acquittal, proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C.); limitation not to be insisted upon if appeal filed in time with delay condonation application.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to file an appeal against the acquittal within 45 days from the date of the order before the appropriate Court; the appellate Court directed not to insist on limitation if the appeal is filed within that time along with a condonation-of-delay application.

Why is it important?

The petition stands disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to file an appeal within a period of 45 days from the date of the order before the appropriate Court, in accordance with law. ¶21

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to file an appeal against the acquittal within 45 days from the date of the order before the appropriate Court; the appellate Court directed not to insist on limitation if the appeal is filed within that time along with a condonation-of-delay application.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, whose complaint under Section 138 NI Act ended in acquittal of the accused, may pursue the remedy of appeal against the acquittal in view of the law declared in Celestium Financial regarding the victim's right to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C.

Court's answer

The petition stands disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to file an appeal within a period of 45 days from the date of the order before the appropriate Court, in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

If the appeal is filed before the concerned Court within the time given along with an application for condonation of delay, the appellate Court shall not insist upon limitation and shall decide the appeal in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Acquittal of accused under Section 138 — Complainant's petition under Section 419(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 challenging acquittal — In view of the law declared by the Supreme Court in Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 INSC 804, that the victim has a right to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C., the High Court disposed of the petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal within 45 days before the appropriate Court, clarifying that the appellate Court shall not insist upon limitation if the appeal is filed within that time with an application for condonation of delay.

A

1

2026:CGHC:4819

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

CRMP No. 2618 of 2024

Shahzade Ahmed S/o Abdul Hameed Aged About 61 Years R/o Afroj Bada, Modahapara, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

... Petitioner

versus

Vasudev Keshwani Profession Business, R/o Proprietor Bharat Boot House, Nagar Palika Complex Makai Chowk, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

... Respondents

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Ms. Anamika Jain, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Tridib Bhattacharya, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Order on Board

28/01/2026

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 419(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 against the judgment dated 30.04.2024, passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, District Raipur, in Criminal Complaint Case No. 2044/2015, whereby the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.01.29 19:38:55 +0530

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that recently in judgment dated 08.04.2025, rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. , 2025 INSC 804, right to file appeal under

2

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 further submits that the case may be disposed of reserving liberty so as to avail the said remedy.

In view of the aforesaid submissions and considering the law declared in the matter of Celestium Financial (supra), this petition stands disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner 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 along with an application for condonation of delay, it would not insist upon the limitation, while deciding the same and will proceed to decide the same in accordance with law.

Registry shall return the certified copy of the judgment and relevant documents to counsel for the petitioner after retaining its photocopy.

Registry shall send back the record to the concerned Court.

Accordingly, this CRMP is disposed of .

Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

ved

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the petitioner, whose complaint under Section 138 NI Act ended in acquittal of the accused, may pursue the remedy of appeal against the acquittal in view of the law declared in Celestium Financial regarding the victim's right to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C.medium confidence¶20
The court held
The petition stands disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to file an appeal within a period of 45 days from the date of the order before the appropriate Court, in accordance with law.ratio¶21

Cases cited

Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority

AI extract

Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc.Applied¶18
2025 INSC 804 · Who else cites this

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 3 enactments

AI extract

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023Section 419(4)¶16
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881Section 138¶16
Cr.P.C.proviso to Section 372¶20

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment dated 30.04.2024 acquitting the respondent/accused of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881¶16
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, District Raipur · 30.04.2024
Prior proceeding
Trial of Criminal Complaint Case No. 2044/2015 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, culminating in acquittal of the respondent/accused under Section 138 NI Act¶16

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Shahzade Ahmed S/o Abdul Hameed Aged About 61 Years R/o Afroj Bada, Modahapara, District Raipur Chhattisgarh¶6
Anamika Jain
respondent
Vasudev Keshwani Profession Business, R/o Proprietor Bharat Boot House, Nagar Palika Complex Makai Chowk, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh¶9
Tridib Bhattacharya

Coram

AI extract

Ravindra Kumar Agrawalauthor¶13

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Chhattisgarh HC
Decided on: 27 Jan 2026 · January
Registered: 24 Sept 2024
Case no.: CRMP/2618/2024
CNR: CGHC010315682024
Topic: Cheque Dishonour
Bench: Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: CRMP

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Chaitanya Modi Vs State of Chhattisgarh
26 Jan 2026
Ashish Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh
26 Jan 2026
Rajesh Kumar @ Chhotu Vs State of Chhattisgarh
26 Jan 2026
State of Chhattisgarh Vs Nandshyam Sahu
27 Jan 2026
Khusiram @ Bandu Rajak Vs State of Chhattisgarh
27 Jan 2026
Manharan Kariyare Vs State of Chhattisgarh
27 Jan 2026

Cite this judgement

Shahzade Ahmed v. Vasudev Keshwani, CRMP/2618/2024 (CG), decided on 27 January 2026.

The High Court of Chhattisgarh publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Cases cited1

Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc.Applied¶18

Open Authorities

Statutes3

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023Section 419(4)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881Section 138
Cr.P.C.proviso to Section 372

View all statutes

Procedural history2

Judgment dated 30.04.2024 acquitting the respondent/accused of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, District Raipur · 30.04.2024
Trial of Criminal Complaint Case No. 2044/2015 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, culminating in acquittal of the respondent/accused under Section 138 NI Act

View full history

Bench / Coram

Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Parties & counsel