Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | ACQA/534/2024 of Somit Kumar Sahu Vs Mangilal Rathi |
| CNR | CGHC010239182024 |
| Date of Registration | 18-07-2024 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Judgment Author | Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal |
| Court | High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur |
| Bench | Single Judge |
| Precedent Value | Affirms and Applies Supreme Court Precedent |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms Celestium Financial (2025 INSC 804) |
| Type of Law |
|
| Questions of Law | Whether a complainant under Section 138 of the N.I. Act qualifies as a “victim” under CrPC Section 2(wa) (BNSS Section 2(y)) and can appeal an acquittal order under the proviso to CrPC Section 372. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The High Court applied the Supreme Court’s ruling in Celestium Financial (2025 INSC 804) to hold that a complainant in proceedings under Section 138 N.I. Act is a “victim” as per CrPC Section 2(wa) and BNSS Section 2(y), and is therefore entitled to invoke the proviso to CrPC Section 372 (BNSS Section 413) to challenge an acquittal. The Court further directed that any such appeal filed within 60 days of this order would not be subject to limitation objections and must be decided on merits. |
| Judgments Relied Upon | Celestium Financial vs A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 INSC 804 |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Applied Supreme Court interpretation that “victim” under CrPC includes complainants in NI Act cases; corresponding definitions in BNSS; entitlement to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC; power to condone delay. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Two separate acquittal appeals (ACQA 534/2024 and ACQA 515/2024) were filed under Section 378(4) CrPC against acquittals on 26.07.2022 by the JMFC, Dallirajhara, in Complaint Cases No. 94/2019 and 57/2019 under Section 138 N.I. Act. |
| Citations | 2025 INSC 804 |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All trial courts and magistrates in Chhattisgarh High Court’s jurisdiction |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts considering appeals in Section 138 N.I. Act matters |
| Follows | Celestium Financial vs A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 INSC 804 |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Confirms that complainants in Section 138 N.I. Act proceedings qualify as “victims” under CrPC Section 2(wa) and BNSS Section 2(y).
- Empowers such complainants to file appeals against acquittal orders under the proviso to CrPC Section 372 (BNSS Section 413).
- High Court will condone limitation objections if the appeal is filed within 60 days of this order.
- Provides a clear procedural roadmap for challenging acquittals in NI Act cases.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The appellants filed appeals under Section 378(4) CrPC against acquittals in two complaints under Section 138 N.I. Act.
- Counsel relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial (2025 INSC 804), which held that a complainant in Section 138 proceedings is a “victim” under CrPC Section 2(wa) and BNSS Section 2(y).
- That decision further recognized the complainant’s right to appeal under the proviso to CrPC Section 372 (BNSS Section 413).
- In light of Celestium Financial, the High Court disposed of the appeals, reserving liberty to file fresh appeals within 60 days and directed trial courts not to insist on limitation.
Arguments by the Parties
Appellant (Complainant):
- Relied on Celestium Financial (2025 INSC 804) to assert that complainants under Section 138 N.I. Act are “victims” under CrPC Section 2(wa) and entitled to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC.
Factual Background
The appellant in each case had initiated prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Both complaint cases (Nos. 94/2019 and 57/2019) resulted in acquittal by the JMFC, Dallirajhara, on 26.07.2022. The complainant appealed the acquittals under Section 378(4) CrPC.
Statutory Analysis
- CrPC Section 2(wa): Definition of “victim” expanded by Celestium Financial to include NI Act complainants.
- BNSS Section 2(y): Corresponding definition adopted from CrPC.
- CrPC Section 372 proviso (BNSS Section 413): Right of “victim” to appeal against certain orders.
- Supreme Court’s interpretation treated limitation as waivable where appeal is filed promptly.
Procedural Innovations
- High Court directs that limitation objections be waived if appeal is filed within 60 days of this order.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed
Citations
- Celestium Financial vs A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 INSC 804 (paragraph references as per reported text)