Punjab-Haryana High Court
Deep Kumar Gupta vs Gurdial Singh on 2 December, 2025
AMIT KAUNDAL 2025.12.05 15:01 CRA-S-349-SB-2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 337/2 CRA-S-349-SB-2008 Date of decision : 02.12.2025 Deep Kumar Gupta c/o M/s Kailash Oil Mills (Export Division) er Appellant Versus Gurdial Singh Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Ms. Nitika Goel, Advocate for Mr. Prateek Mahajan, Advocate for the appellant. REE H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral)
1. The present appeal is arising out of an application preferred under section 378(4) Cr.P.C. seeking grant of leave to appeal against the judgement of acquittal dated 20.09.2006 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Batala in the complaint case filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred as "NI Act').
a. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent, in order to discharge his lability, had issued a cheque bearing No.@13229 dated 18.07.2003, amounting to Es.3 lakhs, drawn on Punjab and Sind Bank, Dalhousie Road, Pathankot, which was dishonoured with the remarks 'Funds Insufficient', Consequently, the complaint under Section 138 of Act was fled against the respondent which was dismissed by the learned trial Court vide judgement dated 20.09.2006 and the respomdent was acquitted.
| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh 2025: PHHC: 166420 & CRA-S-349-SB-2008 ot
3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the material available on record.
4. Before proceeding to hear the application (for grant of special leave to appeal)/appeal, it is important to decide whether the right of the victim to file an appeal against acquittal in a complaint case would fall under Section 372 or Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C.
5. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208, had laid comprehensive interpretation of Sections 372 and 378(4) of Cr.P.C. and had concluded that the victim has a right to file an appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions. The relevant extract thereof is reproduced hereunder:-
"7.12 XXXXXXX secondly, the right of a victim of a crime must be placed on par with the right of an accused wha has suffered a conviction, who, as a matter of right can prefer an appeal under Section 374 of the CrPC. A person convicted of a crime has the right to prefer an appeal under Section 374 as @ matter of right and not being subjected ta any conditions. Similarly, a victim of a crime, whatever be the nature of the crime, unconditionally must have a right ta prefer an appeal, Thirdly, if is for this reason that the Parliament thought it fit to insert the proviso io sub-section 372 without mandating any condition precedent io be fulfilled av the victim of an offence, which expression also includes the legal representatives of a deceased victim who can préfer an appeal.
On the contrary, as against an order of acquittal, the State, through the Public Prosecutor can prefer an appeal even if the complainant does wot prefer such an appeal, though of course such an appeal is with the leave of the court. However, it is not always necessary for the State or a complainant to prefer an appeal. But when it comes to a victim's right to prefer an appeal, the insistence on seeking special leave to appeal From the High Court under Section 378(4) of the CrPC would be AMIT KAUNDAL 2025.12.05 15:01 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh 2025: PHHC: 166420 & CRA-S-349-SB-2008 contrary to what has been intended by the Parliament by insertion of the provise to Section 372 af the Cr PC.
Fourthly, the Parliament has not amended Section 378 to circumscribe ihe victim's right to prefer an appeal just as if has with regard to a complainant or the State filing an appeal. Gn the other fand, the Parliament has inserted the proviso to Section 372 so as to envisage a superior right for the victim of an offence to prefer an appeal on the prounds mentioned therein as compared to a complainant, Fufthly, the invelvement of the State in respect af an offence under Section 138 of the Act is conspicuous by its absence. This is because the complaint filled under that provision is in the nature af a private complaint as per Section 200 of the CrP.C. and Section 143 of the Act by an express intention incorporates the provisions of the Cr.P.C. in the matter of trial of such a deemed offence tried as a criminal offence. Therefore, the complainant, who is the victim of a dishonour of cheque nuast be construed to be victim in terms of the provise to Section 372 read with the definition of victim under Section 2fwa) of the Cr. P.C. SONAR
10. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of the CrP.C. 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 Cr.P.C. "
6, in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Celesttum Financial (supra) which has been followed by this Court in CRM- A-886-MA-2015, tilted as 'Rajesh Kumar versus M/s Success Enterprises and another', decided on 08.07.2025 and similar view taken by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-A-2700-MA-2018, tited as 'Satish Kumar vs. Jugal Kishor' decided on 02.07.2025, the learned Sessions Fudge, Gurdaspur AMIT KAUNDAL 2025.12.05 15:01 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh 2025: PHHC: 1686420 :
CRA-S-349-SB-2008 -4-is directed to treat the present appeal as an appeal filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. and entrust the sare to appropriate Court for its disposal.
wy /, The Registry is directed to send the complete paper-book and the record of the case to the learned Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur forthwith.
8, Disposed of accordingly.
9, Pending application(s), ifany, shall also stand disposed of. (H.S.GREWAL) 02.12.2025 JUDGE A.Kaundal Whether speaking/reasoned_ : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document