Chattisgarh High Court
Dinesh Kumar Bulani vs Vikas Tekchandani on 12 September, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:46811
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
ACQA No.524 of 2024
Dinesh Kumar Bulani S/o Shri Dularam Bulani Aged About 36 Years R/o Ward
No.4, Kasturba Nagar, Sindhi Colony, P.S. Civil Line, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
...Appellant/Complainant
versus
Vikas Tekchandani S/o Shri Arjun Das Tekchandani, R/o Street Of Dr. Shukla,
Sindhi Mohlaa Mashanganj, Beside Of Hospice, P.S. City Kotwali, Tahsil And
District Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Appellant : Shri T. R. Patel, Advocate appears on behalf of
Shri Vikas Kumar Pandey, learned counsel
For Respondent(s) : None
Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal
Judgment on Board
12/09/2025
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 21.12.2022 passed by the Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur (CG) in Complaint Case
SATISH
TUMANE
No.693/2016, whereby, the Respondent/accused has been
acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Digitally
signed by
SATISH
TUMANE
Date:
Instrument Act, 1881.
2025.09.15
10:56:39
+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) 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 21.12.2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Bilaspur (CG) in Complaint Case No.693/2016, before the
concerned Sessions Judge within a period of 30 days from the date
of receipt of copy of this order. Order accordingly.
4) 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.
5) 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.
6) Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
SD/--/--/-
(Sanjay S. Agrawal)
JUDGE
Tumane
