Awadhesh Kahara vs Surendra Singh
2025 Latest Caselaw 755 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Awadhesh Kahara vs Surendra Singh on 25 July, 2025

                                                              1




                                                                           2025:CGHC:36178


                                                                                          NAFR

                                  HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                                                 ACQA No. 16 of 2023


                        •   Awadhesh Kahara S/o Shri Badri Prasad Kahara, Aged About 40
CHANDRAKANT
DEWANGAN                    Years, R/o Bhatapara, Janjgir, Police Station Janjgir, Civil And Revenue
                            District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.).
Digitally signed
by
                                                                                      ... Appellant
CHANDRAKANT
DEWANGAN
Date:
2025.07.25
17:41:57 +0530
                                                         versus


                        •   Surendra Singh S/o Shri Manu Singh Chauhan, Aged About 28 Years,
                            Caste Rajput, R/o Village Khokhasa, Near Railway Braze, Police
                            Station And Tahsil Janjgir, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir-Champa
                            (C.G.).
                                                                                    ... Respondent

For Appellant : Mr. Paras Mani Shriwas, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Shashwat Mishra, Advocate.

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal

Judgment on Board

25/07/2025

1) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant under

Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against

the judgment of acquittal dated 16/02/2018 passed by the Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in

Criminal Case No.06/2017, whereby, the Respondent/accused has

been acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instrument Act, 1881.

2) At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits

that recently in the judgment dated 08/04/2025 rendered by

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of M/s Celestium Financial

vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., reported in 2025 INSC 804, right to file

appeal under 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. Learned Counsel for

the appellant submits further that the Supreme Court in the said

matter has reserved the liberty in favour of the petitioner therein to

prefer an appeal in the light of the provisions of Section 372 of the

Cr.P.C, and, therefore, in the instant case also the appellant may be

permitted to withdraw this appeal with liberty to prefer an appeal

before the concerned Session Judge under proviso to Section 372

Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. He further submits that the limitation may

not come in the way while deciding the appeal on its merits.

3) Learned counsel for the respondent submits that in case an appeal

is filed, the respondent will not insist upon the limitation.

4) In the light of the submissions made herein-above and considering

the law declared by the Supreme Court in the said matter, this

Court is inclined to permit the appellant to withdraw this appeal by

granting him liberty to prefer the appeal against the impugned

judgment dated 16/02/2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First

Class, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Criminal Case

No.06/2017, before the concerned Sessions Judge within a period

of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Order

accordingly.

5) It is clarified that if such an appeal is preferred before the concerned

Session Judge 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.

6) Registry shall return the certified copy of the impugned judgment

and relevant documents to counsel for the appellant after retaining

the photocopy of the same and, shall remit the record to the

concerned Court forthwith.

7)     Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.

                                                                Sd/-
                                                         (Sanjay S. Agrawal)
                                                               JUDGE



Chandrakant