Rewaram Patel vs Mayank Sen
2025 Latest Caselaw 3169 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Rewaram Patel vs Mayank Sen on 20 June, 2025

                                                                       1




                                                                                        2025:CGHC:26388
                                                                                                         NAFR

                                              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                                                            ACQA No. 186 of 2022

                              Rewaram Patel S/o Roushan Lal Patle, Aged About 25 Years, R/o.
                              Mouharibhatha,     Mahasamund,         Police   Station   Mahasamund,         District
                              Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.
                                                                                                     ... Appellant
                                                                     versus
                              Mayank Sen S/o Sevak Ram Sen, Ward No. 19, Behind Panshil Club,
                              Mahasamund,       Police     Station    Mahasamund,       District     Mahasamund
                              Chhattisgarh.
                                                                                                   ... Respondent

For Appellant : Ms. Prachi Singh, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Shikhar Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent : Shri Vaibhav Goverdhan, Advocate.

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal

Judgment on Board 20/06/2025

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 11/12/2014 passed by the Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Mahasamund (C.G.) in Complaint Case

No.13/2014, whereby, the Respondent/accused has been acquitted

NARESH by NARESH KUMAR KAMDE KUMAR Date:

KAMDE 2025.06.20 18:48:07 +0530

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 11/12/2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First

Class, Mahasamund (C.G.) in Complaint Case No.13/2014 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

Kamde