Hare Ram Yadav Vs State & Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2025)

Hare Ram Yadav Vs State & Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of and directed to be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC and numbered accordingly; Registry directed to transfer the entire record, including the requisitioned LCR, to the concerned appellate Court of Sessions; order to be communicated to the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, South East District, Saket Courts, for compliance and listing before the concerned Appellate Court on 27.08.2025; parties directed to appear before the Appellate Court on 27.08.2025; Sessions Court requested to dispose of the matter expeditiously.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, being the complainant in the Section 138 NI Act complaint (and thus a victim under Section 2(wa) CrPC per Celestium Financial), is entitled to maintain an appeal against the acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC without seeking leave to appeal under Section 378(4) CrPC. +1 more

Court's answer

This court held that the petitioner, having been the complainant in the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act, is entitled to maintain an appeal under Section 372 of the CrPC — adopting the Apex Court's decision in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran that such a complainant is a victim under Section 2(wa) CrPC entitled to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC without seeking leave under Section 378(4) CrPC.

Ratio / Principle

An appeal by a victim against a judgment of acquittal passed by the learned MM must, under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, be heard by the learned Court of Sessions; allowing the petition to continue before this Court would deprive the parties of a forum of challenge.

Key takeaways

Disposition: the present matter was disposed of with direction that the petition be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC and numbered accordingly.ratio¶15
Since the matter had been pending before this Court since 2022, the learned Sessions Court was requested to dispose of the matter expeditiously (supplementary/administrative direction alongside the transfer directions, including transfer of the record with LCR and appearance before the Appellate Court on 27.08.2025).obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Amit Mahajan, J) — CRL.L.P. 528/2022, Hare Ram Yadav v. State & Anr., decided 23.07.2025: a leave-to-appeal petition under Section 378 CrPC against the judgment dated 26.09.2022 whereby the Metropolitan Magistrate, South East District, Saket Courts, acquitted Respondent No. 2 under Section 138 NI Act in CC No. 5507/2021. Applying Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320 — under which a complainant under Section 138 NI Act suffers economic loss by cheque dishonour, qualifies as a victim under Section 2(wa) CrPC, and may maintain an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC without leave under Section 378(4) CrPC — the court held the petitioner entitled to maintain an appeal under Section 372 CrPC. Since a victim's appeal against an MM's acquittal must be heard by the Court of Sessions, the matter was disposed of with direction that the petition be treated as such an appeal, numbered accordingly, and the entire record (including the LCR) transferred to the Sessions appellate court; compliance/listing arranged through the Principal District & Sessions Judge with appearance fixed for 27.08.2025 and expeditious disposal requested.

$~20

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- CRL.L.P. 528/2022

HARE RAM YADAV .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Satwant Singh, Adv. versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP for the State Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Adv. for R2

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN O R D E R % 23.07.2025

The present leave to appeal is filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘ CrPC ’) against the judgement dated 26.09.2022, passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (‘ MM ’), South East District, Saket Courts, whereby the Respondent No. 2 was acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘ NI Act ’) in CC No. 5507/2021.

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.

The Hon’ble Apex Court in the recent decision in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran ( supra ) has opined

Page 1 of 3

CRL.L.P. 528/2022

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 31/07/2025 at 12:25:38

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.

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.

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.

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

The order be communicated to the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, South East District, Saket Courts for compliance and listing before the concerned Appellate Court on 27.08.2025.

The parties are directed to appear before the learned Appellate Court on 27.08.2025.

Considering that the matter has been pending before this

Page 2 of 3

CRL.L.P. 528/2022

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 31/07/2025 at 12:25:38

Court since the year 2022, the learned Sessions Court is requested to dispose of the matter expeditiously.

AMIT MAHAJAN, J

JULY 23, 2025 “SS”

Page 3 of 3

CRL.L.P. 528/2022 Page 3 of 3 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 31/07/2025 at 12:25:38