Vijay Thakur vs Bisauha Ram Thakur
2025 Latest Caselaw 3304 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Vijay Thakur vs Bisauha Ram Thakur on 26 June, 2025

                                                                    1




                                                                                    2025:CGHC:28103
                                                                                                 NAFR

                                            HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                                                         ACQA No. 272 of 2023

                            Vijay Thakur S/o. Kamal Thakur, Aged About 46 Years R/o Quarter No.5/ A,
                            Road No.82, Sector-6, Bhilai Nagar, P.S. Bhilai Nagar, District Durg,
                            Chhattisgarh
                                                                                           ... Appellant
                                                                 versus
                            Bisauha Ram Thakur S/o. Late Devlal Thakur, Aged About 55 Years R/o
                            Quarter No.12 F, Road No.31, Sector-4, Bhilai Nagar, P.S. Bhilai Bhatti, Tehsil
                            And District Durg (C.G.) Office - Personnel No. 152702, Post Senior
                            Operator, Pulpit Operator, Department Rolling Mill, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai
                            Nagar, P.S. Bhilai Bhatti, Tehsil And District Durg (C.G.)
                                                                                          ... Respondent

For Appellant : Shri Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent : Shri P.R. Patankar, Advocate.

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal

Judgment on Board

26/06/2025

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 14/07/2023 passed by the Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Durg (C.G.) in CIS No.95/2017, whereby,

the Respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charge under NARESH by NARESH KUMAR KUMAR KAMDE Date:

KAMDE 2025.06.27

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. 10:46:19 +0530

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 14/07/2023 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First

Class, Durg (C.G.) in CIS No.95/2017, 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/-/-Sd/-Sd/-

(Sanjay S. Agrawal) JUDGE

Kamde