Chhattisgarh High Court
CRMP/2386/2026 of SMT. SHAKUNTALA SINGH VISHWAKARMA Vs LAXMI PRASAD VISHWAKARMA on 10 September 2026
2026:CGHC:39930 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2386 of 2026 Smt. Shakuntala Singh Vishwakarma W/o Laxmi Prasad Vishwakarma Aged About 52 Years R/o Sonkarbadi, Near Yogesh Jewelers, Kushalpur, Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus Laxmi Prasad
CGHC010320102026
2026:CGHC:39930
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRMP No. 2386 of 2026
Smt. Shakuntala Singh Vishwakarma W/o Laxmi Prasad Vishwakarma Aged About 52 Years R/o Sonkarbadi, Near Yogesh Jewelers, Kushalpur, Tahsil And District Raipur (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
Laxmi Prasad Vishwakarma S/o Shri Manu Ram Vishwakarma, Aged About 66 Years R/o Aman Nagar, Behind Ashoka Heights, Mova, Police Station Mova, Tahsil And District - Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner
:
Mr. Vipin Punjabi, Advocate
For Respondent
:
Ms. Juhi Anguriya, Advocate
S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 11/09/2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 528 of BNSS r/w 482 of CrPC seeking extension of time to file an appeal before the Sessions Court in pursuance of order dated 22.09.2025 passed in ACQA No. 258 of 2022.
2. The record of the case would show that the petitioner had filed an appeal bearing ACQA No. 258 of 2022 under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before this Court assailing the judgment of acquittal dated 04.02.2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) in Criminal Complaint Case No.929/2019 whereby the Judicial Magistrate First Class has acquitted the respondent/accused from the charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.
3. This Court vide order dated 22.09.2025 has disposed of ACQA No. 258 of 2022 by granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment dated 04.02.2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) in Criminal Complaint Case No.929/2019, before the concerned Sessions Judge within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner could not prefer an appeal before the concerned Appellate Court/Sessions Judge within the stipulated time period on account of the unfortunate demise of a family member and certain personal difficulties and would pray for extending the time limit to prefer the said appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent would vehemently object the aforesaid submission and would submit that the reasons assigned by the learned counsel for the petitioner for delay are neither justifiable nor bonafide, therefore he is not entitled to be granted any further extension of time for preferring the appeal and she prays for rejection of the instant petition.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is directed to prefer an appeal before the concerned Appellate Court/Sessions Judge within a further period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
8. In the event the petitioner files appeal within further period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, neither the Appellate Court/Sessions Judge nor respondent will take a plea of limitation as this Court has already condoned the delay in preferring the appeal by the time period granted by this Court and the Appellate Court/Sessions Judge is also directed to decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner on its own merit in accordance with law. Sd/---/---/-/---/-/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen