H.D.F.C Bank Ltd. Vs Gurlal Singh — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

H.D.F.C Bank Ltd. Vs Gurlal Singh — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of with directions: the appeal to be treated as instituted under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C.; the learned Sessions Judge to assign it to an appropriate Court for disposal on merits in accordance with law; the Appellate Court to decide it expeditiously without being impeded by any delay in filing; and the Registry to transmit the order with the complete paper book and return the trial Court record, if received, to the learned Sessions Judge.

Issue for consideration

Whether an appeal against an order of acquittal passed in a complaint case under Section 138 of the NI Act can be entertained under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. at the instance of the complainant?

Court's answer

The question whether a complainant in a Section 138 NI Act case can appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. is no longer res integra, having been authoritatively settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial (supra).

Ratio / Principle

Adopting the Supreme Court's ruling in M/s Celestium Financial, this Court proceeded on the footing that a Section 138 complainant, qualifying as a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) Cr.P.C., may pursue the appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. without seeking special leave under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C.

Key takeaways

The present appeal is directed to be treated as one authoritatively instituted under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C.ratio¶19
The learned Sessions Judge concerned shall treat the present appeal as an appeal filed under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and assign the same to an appropriate Court for disposal on merits, in accordance with law.ratio¶20
The concerned Appellate Court shall proceed to decide the appeal expeditiously, without being impeded by any delay in filing the appeal, in view of the legal position now clarified by the Hon'ble Apex Court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Leave-to-appeal application (CRM-A-1270-2025 O&M) by HDFC Bank Limited, complainant in a dismissed Section 138 NI Act complaint in which the accused Gurlal Singh stood acquitted, disposed of by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana (Ramesh Kumari, J., Oral, 20.08.2025). Relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in M/s Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 INSC 804 : 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208, and on this Court's own earlier view in Rajat Deep v. Prince (CRM-A-1320-MA-2016, disposed 21.07.2025), the Court held the question no longer res integra: a Section 138 NI Act complainant qualifies as a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) Cr.P.C. and may appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. without special leave under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. The appeal was directed to be treated as instituted under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C., assigned by the learned Sessions Judge to an appropriate Court for disposal on merits, and to be decided expeditiously without being impeded by any delay in filing.

CRM-A-1270-2025 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

237

CRM-A-1270-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.08.2025

HDFC Bank Limited

.....Applicant

Versus

Gurlal Singh

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMARI

Present : Mr. Saurabh Bhardwaj, Advocate for the applicant.

RAMESH KUMARI, J.(Oral)

The applicant has filed the present application seeking grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed in a complaint case instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘NI Act’), whereby the complaint filed by the applicant was dismissed and the accused was acquitted.

The limited question arising for consideration in the present proceedings is whether an appeal against an order of acquittal passed in a complaint case under Section 138 of the NI Act can be entertained under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. at the instance of the complainant?

The issue is no longer res integra . In ‘M/s Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804: 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208’ , the Hon'ble Supreme Court authoritatively held that a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act, qualifies as a ‘victim’ under Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C., being the person who suffers financial loss due to the dishonour of a cheque. Consequently, such a complainant is entitled to Rajeev Purohit 2025.08.21 10:36 pursue an appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-A-1270-2025 2

Cr.P.C., without the requirement of seeking special leave under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C.

This Court deems it appropriate to direct that the present appeal be treated as one authoritatively instituted under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C.

In view of the authoritative pronouncement in M/s Celestium Financial's case (supra) and the view taken by this Court also in CRM-A-1320-MA-2016 titled as Rajat Deep Versus Prince disposed of on 21.07.2025, the present application is disposed of with a direction that the learned Sessions Judge concerned shall treat the present appeal as an appeal filed under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and assign the same to an appropriate Court for disposal on merits, in accordance with law.

The concerned Appellate Court shall proceed to decide the appeal expeditiously, without being impeded by any delay in filing the appeal, in view of the legal position now clarified by the Hon'ble Apex Court.

The Registry is directed to transmit this order along with copy of the complete paper book and return the trial Court record, if received, to the learned Sessions Judge.

20.08.2025		(RAMESH KUMARI)
Rajeev (rvs)		JUDGE
	Whether speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
	Whether reportable	Yes/No

Rajeev Purohit 2025.08.21 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document