Disposed

Ankit Bhanot v. Anil Gupta

Delhi HC14 Aug 2025CRL.L.P./522/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A complainant who lost a Section 138 NI Act case filed leave to appeal against acquittal. Relying on Celestium Financial, the court held he was a victim entitled to appeal without leave and directed the petition be treated as an appeal before the Sessions Court.

What did the court decide?

Petition treated as an appeal under proviso to Section 372 CrPC; record transferred to Sessions Court for listing on 25.09.2025.

Ankit Bhanot Vs Anil Gupta — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~28

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CRL.L.P. 522/2022 ANKIT BHANOT .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rohit Vats, Mr. Varun Gupta & Mr. Dev Bhardwaj, Advs.

¶4

versus

¶5

ANIL GUPTA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Raj Kumar & Ms. Chanchal Sharma, Advs.

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN O R D E R

¶7

% 14.08.2025 1. The present leave to appeal is filed by the petitioner under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘ CrPC ’) against the judgment dated 14.07.2022, passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (‘ MM’ ), New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, whereby the respondent was acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘ NI Act ’) in CC No. 9615/2017.

¶8

At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran : 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320 , the petitioner being a victim is entitled to file an appeal against the judgment of acquittal and is not required to seek leave to appeal. He submits that the present petition be transferred to the learned Court of Sessions to be treated as an appeal.

¶9

The Hon’ble Apex Court in the recent decision in CRL.L.P. 522/2022 Page 1 of 3

¶10

This is a digitally signed order.

¶11

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 11:52:20

¶12

Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran ( supra ) has opined that a complainant who prefers a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act is an aggrieved party who suffers economic loss due to the dishonour of cheque, and such a complainant qualifies as a victim within the meaning of Section 2(wa) of the CrPC. Consequently, it was held that such a complainant is entitled to the benefit of the proviso of Section 372 of the CrPC, enabling them to maintain an appeal against an order of acquittal without seeking leave to appeal under Section 378(4) of the CrPC.

¶13

The petitioner was the complainant in the complaint preferred under Section 138 of the NI Act, and is thus entitled to maintain an appeal under Section 372 of the CrPC. 5. In terms of the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, an appeal by a victim against the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned MM will have to be heard by the learned Court of Sessions. If the petition is allowed to continue before this Court, the parties will stand to lose a forum of challenge. 6. In view of the above, the present matter is disposed of with direction that the present petition be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC and numbered accordingly.

¶14

The Registry is directed to transfer entire record of the case, including the requisitioned copy of Trial Court Record, to the concerned appellate Court of Sessions.

¶15

The order be communicated to the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge for compliance and listing before the concerned Appellate Court on 25.09.2025. 9. The parties are directed to appear before the concerned

¶16

Page 2 of 3

¶17

CRL.L.P. 522/2022

¶18

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/08/2025 at 11:52:20

¶19

Appellate Court on 25.09.2025.

¶20

Considering that the matter has been pending before this Court since the year 2022, the learned Sessions Court is requested to dispose of the matter expeditiously.

¶21

AMIT MAHAJAN, J

¶22

AUGUST 14, 2025 “SK”

¶23

Page 3 of 3

¶24

CRL.L.P. 522/2022

¶25

Ankit Bhanot v. Anil Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Bhanot v. Anil Gupta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Religare Finvest Ltd. Vs State

Teson Electronics (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sh. Khema Nand Sharma

Sh. Kanchhid Lal Vs the State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

Ashok Kumar Gupta Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Chandrakant & Ors. Vs Indu Tanwar

Mohit Vs State of NCT of Delhi