The court confirms that, following the Supreme Court’s decision in *M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran*, complainants in Section 138 NI Act cases are “victims” for the purposes of Section 2(y) of the BNSS, 2023, and may thus avail of an appeal under Section 413 of BNSS against acquittal. This judgment aligns with and applies the newly established Supreme Court precedent, providing clear practical recourse for complainants in cheque dishonour matters. Binding authority for courts handling negotiable instrument prosecutions after the BNSS 2023.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | ACQA/127/2025 of RIDDHI SIDDHI FINANCE Vs DOMAR PRASAD SAHU |
| CNR | CGHC010089192025 |
| Date of Registration | 05-03-2025 |
| Decision Date | 02-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | WITHDRAWN |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR JAISWAL |
| Court | High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur |
| Precedent Value | Binding on lower courts within Chhattisgarh; follows Supreme Court precedent |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms ratio of Supreme Court in M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804) |
| Type of Law | Criminal appellate procedure—Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 |
| Questions of Law | Whether the complainant in a Section 138 NI Act prosecution is a “victim” as per BNSS, and thereby entitled to file an appeal against an acquittal under Section 413 of BNSS. |
| Ratio Decidendi | The court relies on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial, holding that a complainant under Section 138 of the NI Act is a ‘victim’ as per Section 2(y) of BNSS. Consequently, the complainant has the right to appeal an acquittal under Section 413 of BNSS. The appellant is granted liberty to file such an appeal within 60 days, and the limitation period will not be an impediment. The practical effect is an explicit and binding clarification of this new appellate remedy post-BNSS. |
| Judgments Relied Upon | M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804) |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Supreme Court’s interpretation of “victim” under Section 2(y) of BNSS, and appellate rights under Section 413 of BNSS. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Appeal under Section 419(4) of BNSS, 2023 was filed against a Magistrate’s acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act prosecution. Appellant sought liberty to pursue a victim’s appeal as per new Supreme Court precedent. |
| Citations | M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804) |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Chhattisgarh |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts; courts interpreting BNSS, 2023, and cheque dishonour prosecutions |
| Follows | M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804) |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Recognises that complainants under Section 138 of the NI Act are “victims” within the meaning of BNSS, 2023 (Section 2(y)).
- Such complainants now have a clear statutory right to file an appeal against acquittal under Section 413 of BNSS.
- Limitation will not bar such appeals if filed as per court’s directions pursuant to withdrawal of earlier remedy.
- Lawyers representing cheque dishonour complainants may directly rely on this precedent to invoke a “victim’s” appellate remedy.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The appellant relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804).
- The Supreme Court clarified that a complainant in a Section 138 NI Act case qualifies as a “victim” under Section 2(wa) CrPC and its BNSS equivalent, Section 2(y).
- Consequently, such a complainant is entitled to file an appeal against an acquittal under the relevant victim-appeal provision (Section 413 BNSS).
- In view of this settled law, the Chhattisgarh High Court disposed of the current appeal with liberty to the appellant to file a victim’s appeal within 60 days.
- The court directed that if the appeal is filed within the prescribed period, limitation will not hinder its consideration.
- The High Court expressly anchored its decision to the Supreme Court’s recent authoritative interpretation.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Cited the Supreme Court’s decision in M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804).
- Argued that the complainant qualifies as a “victim” for purposes of appellate remedy under Section 413 BNSS.
- Sought liberty to avail this newly clarified remedy for a victim’s appeal.
Respondent
No specific arguments of the respondent are recorded in the judgment excerpt.
Factual Background
The appeal was filed under Section 419(4) of BNSS, 2023, against the acquittal of the accused in a cheque dishonour case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as decided by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg. The appellant sought to withdraw the present appeal and reserve liberty to file a victim’s appeal under Section 413 of the BNSS, as clarified by the Supreme Court’s recent decision.
Statutory Analysis
- The court discussed Section 2(y) of the BNSS, 2023, which defines “victim” and mirrors provisions of Section 2(wa) of CrPC.
- Interpretation of Section 413 of the BNSS, 2023, regarding the right of a victim to prefer an appeal against acquittal.
- Application of the Supreme Court’s construction of these provisions, particularly their applicability to complainants in Section 138 NI Act prosecutions.
Procedural Innovations
- The High Court granted express liberty to withdraw the present appeal and file a new victim’s appeal within 60 days.
- Ordered that limitation will not be a bar if the appeal is filed within the provided window.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Supreme Court’s new interpretation is followed and implemented.
Citations
- M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804)