Disposed¶24

Prem Kumar v. Hans Raj (Fauji)

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Sept 2025CRA-S/1940/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of complainant's appeal against acquittal under Section 138 NI Act; complainant as 'victim' under Cr.P.C. 1973/BNSS 2023; proviso to Section 372 CrPC versus special leave under Section 378(4) CrPC / Sections 413 and 419(4) BNSS 2023; M/s Celestium Financial 2025 INSC 804; Raj Kumar 2025:PHHC:079740 (CRM-A-826-2025); remittal of CRA-S-1940-SB-2014 to Sessions Judge, Amritsar; merits left open; Prem Kumar v. Hans Raj (Foji); decision 08.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Appeal CRA-S-1940-SB-2014, along with accompanying application(s), disposed of by remitting it to the learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar, to be treated as filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C., 1973/Section 413 of BNSS, 2023; Registry directed to send the complete records expeditiously; merits left open to the Sessions Court. ¶24

Prem Kumar Vs Hans Raj (Fauji) — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether an appeal against an order of acquittal in a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, preferred by the complainant, falls within the purview of proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C./Section 413 BNSS, 2023, so that the complainant need not seek special leave to appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C./419(4) BNSS, 2023. +1 more

¶22

Court's answer

Adopting the dicta in M/s Celestium Financial (SC) and the pronouncement of this Court in Raj Kumar (CRM-A-826-2025), the Court proceeded on the footing that an appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act proceeding preferred by the complainant falls within proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C./Section 413 BNSS, 2023, the complainant being a 'victim' under the Cr.P.C., 1973/BNSS, 2023, and is therefore not confined to the special-leave route under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C./419(4) BNSS.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The present appeal, along with accompanying application(s), is remitted to the learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar, with a direction to treat it as having been filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C., 1973/Section 413 of BNSS, 2023; the Sessions Judge may entrust the appeal to himself or assign it to another Court of competent jurisdiction for disposal according to law.

¶29

Key takeaways

This Court expressly did not delve into the merits of the appeal or the accompanying applications; the merits are left open for adjudication by the learned Sessions Court, which shall adjudicate without being influenced by any observation made in this judgment.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Sumeet Goel, J., oral; decision dated 08.09.2025), CRA-S-1940-SB-2014 — Prem Kumar v. Hans Raj (Foji): An appeal against an order of acquittal in a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, preferred by the complainant, falls within the purview of the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C./Section 413 BNSS, 2023, the complainant being a 'victim' under the Cr.P.C., 1973/BNSS, 2023; the complainant is therefore not required to obtain special leave under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C./Section 419(4) BNSS, 2023 (applying M/s Celestium Financial, 2025 INSC 804, and this Court's judgment in Raj Kumar, CRM-A-826-2025). Rather than dismissing the 2014 appeal — filed with a leave application under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. — on this technical infirmity, the Court disposed of it by remitting the appeal and its applications to the learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar, to be treated as filed under Section 372/Section 413 BNSS, leaving the merits entirely open for adjudication by the Sessions Court.

¶1

CRA-S-1940-SB-2014

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

231 CRA-S-1940-SB-2014

¶5

Date of decision: 08.09.2025

PREM KUMAR

....APPELLANT

V/s

HANS RAJ (FOJI)

....RESPONDENT

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: None for the appellant/applicant.

¶12

Ms. Isha Goyal, Advocate for the respondent.

¶13

¶14

SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)

¶15

The substantive prayer made in the present appeal reads, thus:

¶16

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the present appeal may kindly allowed and the be dated impugned order 11.9.2009 passed by Ld. Trial Court may kindly be set aside and the respondent be convicted and awarded sentence of imprisonment as provided under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act in the interest of justice.”

¶17

Alongwith an appeal, an application for grant of leave has also been preferred under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C., 1973

¶18

I have perused the paper-book.

¶19

Before proceeding to consider the application (for grant of special leave to appeal)/appeal, it would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by this Court in CRM-A-826-2025 titled as Raj Kumar vs. Rajender : 2025:PHHC:079740 wherein, this Court, while relying upon the dicta of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804 : 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208, has held that an appeal against an order of acquittal in a proceeding under JATIN2025.09.09 08:22 Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 preferred by the I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

CRA-S-1940-SB-2014

¶21

¶22

complainant, falls squarely within the purview of proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C./413 of BNSS, 2023. This judicial enunciation was predicated upon the interpretative understanding that, for the purposes of a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the complainant is encompassed within the expansive definition of ‘ victim ’ as delineated in the Cr.P.C., 1973/BNSS, 2023. Consequently, the complainant is not constrained to pursue the more stringent procedure of seeking special leave to appeal under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., 1973/419(4) of BNSS, 2023. This Court underscored that the scope and ambit of proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C./413 BNSS are inherently broader and more accommodating when juxtaposed with the comparatively narrower confines of Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., 1973/419(4) of BNSS, 2023, which mandates the procurement of special leave from the High Court for an appeal against an acquittal in a complaint case.

¶23

However, demonstrating a profound commitment to the overarching principles of justice and a determination to preclude mere procedural technicalities from eclipsing the substantive adjudication of the case, this Court, instead of summarily dismissing the appeal on this technical infirmity, judiciously opted to relegate the appeal, along with accompanying application(s), to the concerned Sessions Court.

¶24

Ergo; in view of the dicta of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial (supra) as also the pronouncement of this Court in Raj Kumar (supra); the present appeal, along with accompanying application(s), is disposed of as hereunder:

¶25

(i) The present appeal, along with accompanying application(s), is remitted to the learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar with a direction to treat the

¶26

JATIN 2025.09.09 08:22 I attest to the accuracy and same as having been filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C., 1973/Section 413 of integrity of this document

¶27

CRA-S-1940-SB-2014

¶28

¶29

BNSS, 2023. The said learned Sessions Judge may entrust the appeal to himself or assign it to another Court of competent jurisdiction for its disposal, as per law.

¶30

(ii) Needless to clarify that this Court has not delved into the merits of the appeal as also along with accompanying application(s); and the same is left open for consideration of the concerned learned Sessions Court, which shall indubitably adjudicate the same without getting influenced by any observation made hereinabove.

¶31

(iii). The Registry is directed to send, expeditiously, the complete records of the present appeal (including the paper-book) to the said learned Sessions Judge.

(SUMEET GOEL)

JUDGE

08.09.2025

jatin

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶37

JATIN 2025.09.09 08:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Prem Kumar v. Hans Raj (Fauji)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Kumar v. Hans Raj (Fauji)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajbeer Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sat Pal Vs Phoolpati and Anr.

Sahil Arora Vs Yogesh Jairath

Sukhwinder Singh Alias Kala Vs State of Punjab

Amrinder Singh @ Amrinder Singh Pama Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Ruby Vs Gurmeet Kaur and Anr.