Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Iris Computers Ltd vs Savneet Kaur on 30 October, 2025
CRM-A-1434-2024 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
246
CRM-A-1434-2024 (O&M)
Date of decision: 30.10.2025
M/s Iris Computers Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Savneet Kaur ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY
Present : Mr. Munish Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.
*****
AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL)
CRM-43617-2024 Application is for condonation of delay of 289 days in filing the appeal.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same stands allowed and delay of 289 days in filing the appeal is condoned. Main Case
1. The applicant has filed the present application seeking grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 10.11.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurugram, in a case stemming from complaint dated 20.01.2016 filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter 'NI Act')
2. The limited question arising for consideration in the present proceedings is whether an appeal against an order of acquittal passed in a complaint case under Section 138 of the NI Act can be entertained under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. at the instance of the complainant?
3. The issue is no longer res integra. In 'M/s Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804: 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208', the Hon'ble Supreme Court authoritatively held that a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act, qualifies as a 'victim' under 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 13-11-2025 20:59:15 ::: CRM-A-1434-2024 (O&M) 2 Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C., being the person who suffers financial loss due to the dishonour of a cheque. Consequently, such a complainant is entitled to pursue an appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., without the requirement of seeking special leave under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C.
4. Adopting a pragmatic and justice oriented approach and guided by the principle that procedural rule must serve and not obstruct the course of justice, this Court deems it appropriate to direct that the present appeal be treated as one authoritatively instituted under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C.
5. Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in Celestium Financial (supra), the present application seeking leave to appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge, Gurugram with a direction to treat the same as appeal filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. Learned Sessions Judge may retain the said appeal on his/her Board or assign it to some other Court of competent jurisdiction.
6. The Registry is directed to transmit this order along with copy of the complete paper-book and return the trial Court record, if received, to the learned Sessions Judge, concerned.
7. Disposed of accordingly.
8. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
(AARADHNA SAWHNEY)
JUDGE
30.10.2025
Hemant
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No
Whether reportable : Yes / No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 13-11-2025 20:59:16 :::