Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Laxman Krushnarao Dhakate vs Mohd. Imran Rizwi S/O Abdul Sattar Rizwi on 10 December, 2025

Order                                                                                               S138NI
                                                    1


                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
                                CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 261/2014
          (Sudhirkumar S/o Brijmohan Zanwar Vs. A.C.E. - S.B. Sales & services Pvt. Ltd. & ors.,)

                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 263/2014
           (Sudhirkumar S/o Brijmohan Zanwar Vs. A.C.E. S.B. Sales & services Pvt. Ltd. & ors.

                               CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 492/2015
        (Shekhar @ Chandrashekhar S/o Vishnuji Headau Vs. Dr. Ramkrushna S/o. Nathuji Shinde),

                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 127/2017
                  (Prabhakar S/o Ukandrao Sonkusare Vs. Vivek S/o. Balchandra Awale),
                               CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 403/2021
              (Laxman Krushnarao Dhakate Vs. Mohd. Imran Rizwi S/o Abdul Sattar Rizwi),

____________________________________________________________________________________________
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders           Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.

                                        Common Order.

                                                        CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
                                                        DATE : 10/12/2025


                                The principal challenge in all these matters pertains to

                  acquittal in cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

                  Act. These Applications/Appeals are filed under Section 378 of the

                  Code of Criminal Procedure. In some matters, applications are being

                  filed either seeking condonation of delay in preferring the appeal or

                  leave to file appeal.

                  2.            Now so far as the issue in respect of preferring Appeal

                  under Section 372 of the Code by the complainant/victim is


.
 Order                                                                   S138NI
                                   2

        concerned, the same was considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

        in case of Celestium Financial .vrs. A. Ganasekaran Etc (2025 SCC

        Online SC 1320), wherein the Supreme Court has held as under :

                 7.7         In the context of offences under the Act,
                 particularly under Section 138 of the said Act, the
                 complainant is clearly the aggrieved party who has suffered
                 economic loss and injury due to the default in payment by
                 the accused owing to the dishonour of the cheque which is
                 deemed to be an offence under that provision. In such
                 circumstances, it would be just, reasonable and in
                 consonance with the spirit of the CrPC to hold that the
                 complainant under the Act also qualifies as a victim within
                 the meaning of Section 2(wa) of the CrPC. Consequently,
                 such a complainant ought to be extended the benefit of the
                 proviso to Section 372, thereby enabling him to maintain
                 an appeal against an order of acquittal in his own right
                 without having to seek special leave under Section 378(4)
                 of the CrPC.

                 7.8        In the case of an offence alleged against an
                 accused under Section 138 of the Act, we are of the view
                 that the complainant is indeed the victim owing to the
                 alleged dishonour of a cheque. In the circumstances, the
                 complainant can proceed as per the proviso to Section 372
                 of the CrPC and he may exercise such an option and he
                 need not then elect to proceed under Section 378 of the
                 CrPC.

                 7.9        In this context, we wish to state that the proviso
                 to Section 372 does not make a distinction between an
                 accused who is charged of an offence under the penal law or
                 a person who is deemed to have committed an offence
                 under Section 138 of the Act. Symmetrical to a victim of an

.
 Order                                                            S138NI
                          3

        offence, a victim of a deemed offence under Section 138 of
        the Act also has the right to prefer an appeal against any
        order passed by the court acquitting the accused or
        convicting for a lesser offence or imposing an inadequate
        compensation. When viewed from the perspective of an
        offence under any penal law or a deemed offence under
        Section 138 of the Act, the right to file an appeal is not
        circumscribed by any condition as such, so long as the
        appeal can be premised in accordance with proviso to
        Section 372 which is the right to file an appeal by a victim,
        provided the circumstances which enable such a victim to
        file an appeal are met. The complainant under Section 138
        is the victim who must also have the right to prefer an
        appeal under the said provision. Merely because the
        proceeding under Section 138 of the Act commences with
        the filing of a complaint under Section 200 of the CrPC by
        a complainant, he does not cease to be a victim inasmuch as
        it is only a victim of a dishonour of cheque who can file a
        complaint. Thus, under Section 138 of the Act both the
        complainant as well as the victim are one and the same
        person.
        .....
        .....
        8.          The right to prefer an appeal is no doubt a
        statutory right and the right to prefer an appeal by an
        accused against a conviction is not merely a statutory right
        but can also be construed to be a fundamental right under
        Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. If that is so, then the
        right of a victim of an offence to prefer an appeal cannot be
        equated with the right of the State or the complainant to
        prefer an appeal. Hence, the statutory rigours for filing of an
        appeal by the State or by a complainant against an order of
        acquittal cannot be read into the proviso to Section 372 of
        the CrPC so as to restrict the right of a victim to file an
        appeal on the grounds mentioned therein, when none

.
 Order                                                          S138NI
                          4

        exists.

        9.          In the circumstances, we find that Section 138 of
        the Act being in the nature of a penal provision by a
        deeming fiction against an accused who is said to have
        committed an offence under the said provision, if acquitted,
        can be proceeded against by a victim of the said offence,
        namely, the person who is entitled to the proceeds of a
        cheque which has been dishonoured, in terms of the proviso
        to Section 372 of the CrPC, as a victim. As already noted, a
        victim of an offence could also be a complainant. In such a
        case, an appeal can be preferred either under the proviso to
        Section 372 or under Section 378 by such a victim. In the
        absence of the proviso to Section 372, a victim of an offence
        could not have filed an appeal as such, unless he was also a
        complainant, in which event he could maintain an appeal if
        special leave to appeal had been granted by the High Court
        and if no such special leave was granted then his appeal
        would not be maintainable at all. On the other hand, if the
        victim of an offence, who may or may not be the
        complainant, proceeds under the proviso to Section 372 of
        the CrPC, then in our view, such a victim need not seek
        special leave to appeal from the High Court. In other words,
        the victim of an offence would have the right to prefer an
        appeal, inter alia, against an order of acquittal in terms of
        the proviso to Section 372 without seeking any special leave
        to appeal from the High Court only on the grounds
        mentioned therein. A person who is a complainant under
        Section 200 of the CrPC who complains about the offence
        committed by a person who is charged as an accused under
        Section 138 of the Act, thus has 51 the right to prefer an
        appeal as a victim under the proviso to Section 372 of the
        CrPC.



.
 Order                                                                     S138NI
                                     5


                    10.         As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of
                    the CrPC was inserted in the statute book only with effect
                    from 31.12.2009. The object and reason for such insertion
                    must be realised and must be given its full effect to by a
                    court. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the
                    victim of an offence has the right to prefer an appeal under
                    the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, irrespective of
                    whether he is a complainant or not. Even if the victim of an
                    offence is a complainant, he can still proceed under the
                    proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to sub-section
                    (4) of Section 378 of the CrPC."


        3.           Considering the above position of law as laid down by the

        Supreme Court, the learned Counsel appearing in the matter for

        applicants/appellants submitted that under proviso to Section 372 of

        the Code of Criminal Procedure, since the victim has a right to prefer

        an appeal against the order passed by the Court acquitting the accused

        or convicting accused for lesser offence or imposing inadequate

        compensation, such appeal shall lie to the Court to which the appeal

        ordinarily lies against the order of conviction. In view of said proviso,

        the learned Counsel prays that the matters be transferred to the

        concerned District and Sessions Court for its disposal in accordance

        with law.




.
 Order                                                                    S138NI
                                   6

        4.         In this view of the matter and considering the observations

        of the Supreme Court referred above, all the matters (applications and

        appeals) are required to be transferred for their disposal to the

        concern District Court, hence the following order.

                                       ORDER

(1) The Applications/Appeals are transferred to the concerned District and Sessions Court, who shall after registering the matters, deal with the matter in accordance with law.

(2) Parties shall appear before the concerned District and Sessions Court, on 07.01.2026.

(3) If the non-applicants/respondents in any of these matters are not served or they are to be served, in that case the concerned District and Sessions Court shall issue notice to them and thereafter proceed further with the matter. (4) The concerned District and Sessions Court are also directed to take into consideration the matters wherein this Court has appointed Advocate from Legal Aid Panel, and if the said Advocate from the Legal Aid Panel is unable to attend or appear before the Court where the matter is transferred, in that eventuality, the District Court shall take necessary steps for appointing another Advocate from the Legal Aid panel for defending the non-applicants/ respondents.

.

Order S138NI 7 (5) In case either of the parties remains absent after transfer of the matter to the District and Sessions Court, the concerned Court/ Judge shall issue notice to the concerned party/ies before proceeding with the matter. (6) All the concerned District and Sessions Court shall treat these matters as appeal under proviso to Section 372 of the Code as per the observations of the Supreme Court in case of Celestium Financial (supra). (7) Registrar (Judicial) of this Court to take further necessary action for transferring these matters to the concerned District and Sessions Court along with record and proceedings, (if any) immediately. (8) If the Record and Proceedings are received, the same shall be sent to the concerned District and Sessions Court along with appeal.

JUDGE Gohane Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane Designation:. PS To Honourable Judge Date: 10/12/2025 18:32:39