Disposed

Jaidev v. the State Govt. of Nct, Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC22 Jul 2025CRL.L.P./67/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A cheque-dishonour complainant sought leave to appeal against his own acquittal. Relying on Celestium Financial holding a complainant is a victim entitled to proceed under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC rather than Section 378(4), the court allowed withdrawal with liberty to refile and excluded limitation time.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to withdraw petition and file appeal under proviso to Section 372 CrPC; period of prosecution of this petition excluded for computing limitation.

Jaidev Vs the State Govt. of Nct, Delhi & Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~9

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.L.P. 67/2025, CRL.M.A. 3016-3017/2025 JAIDEV .....Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Kartik Gaur, Advocate

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT, DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for the State with SI Sachin Panwar, PS Fatehpur Beri

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶9

O R D E R % 22.07.2025

¶10

The Appellant, who is also the complainant in the present case, has filed the instant leave to appeal under Section 419(4) read with 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023¹ (corresponding to Sections 378(4) and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure² ) against judgment of acquittal dated 20^th March, 2024, passed by the Court of MM (NI Act)-06, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi in Complaint Case No. 9247/2019 titled Jaidev v. Sandeep , pertaining to an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881³ .

¶11

However, recently, the Supreme Court in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran Etc.⁴ has held that in cases involving an offence under Section 138 of the NI Act, the complainant is akin to a " victim " who may proceed under the proviso to Section 372 of CrPC and need not invoke

¶12

1 “BNSS”

¶13

2 “CrPC”

¶14

3 “NI Act”

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 24/07/2025 at 11:57:46

¶17

Section 378(4) of CrPC.

¶18

In light of the aforenoted judgment, counsel for the Appellant seeks leave to withdraw the present petition, with liberty to file an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of CrPC. It is further prayed that the period spent in prosecuting the present petition be excluded for the purpose of computing the period of limitation.

¶19

Considering the above, the following directions are issued:

¶20

4.1. Leave and liberty granted. The Appellant is permitted to file an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of CrPC against the judgment of acquittal dated 20^th March, 2024, in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Celestium Financial (supra).

¶21

4.2. Although there has been a delay in filing and re-filing the present petition, the period from the date of its initial filing with the Registry of this Court until the date of listing of the present matter, and for one week from today, shall be excluded for the purpose of computing the period of delay. The Appellant shall be at liberty to pursue the remedy as noted above and may file an application for condonation of delay, if any, which shall then be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law.

¶22

In view of the above, the present appeal is disposed of along with the pending application.

¶23

The Court has not commented on the merits of the case. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

¶24

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶25

JULY 22, 2025/ab

¶26

4 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320.

¶27

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 24/07/2025 at 11:57:46

Jaidev v. the State Govt. of Nct, Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaidev v. the State Govt. of Nct, Delhi & Anr.

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

Arvind Tandon Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Pavan Mishra Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Yash Aggarwal and Ors. Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Rehan Vs State of Gnct of Delhi

Naresh Kumar @ Pahelwan Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Poornima Jain Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited