Disposed¶26

Anuradha v. Gopal Kumar

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Dec 2025CRM-A/1560/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anuradha v. Gopal Kumar, CRM-A-1560-2024, High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, decided 05.12.2025 by Anoop Chitkara J. — transfer of complainant's appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 cheque-dishonour case to the Sessions Court; proviso to Section 372 CrPC; Section 413 BNSS 2023; Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran 2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208; victim's right of appeal; CrPC 1973 repealed; leave to appeal disposed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal referred to the Sessions Court for registration as an appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC/413 BNSS, 2023 (or, on any objection, under the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS, 2023); Registry to transmit the file with the Lower Court's Record to the concerned Sessions Division; leave to appeal and pending applications disposed of. ¶26

Anuradha Vs Gopal Kumar — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the complainant's appeal against acquittal should be transferred to the first Appellate Court (Sessions Court) in view of the Supreme Court's judgment in Celestium Financial, to be registered under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC / Section 413 BNSS, 2023. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

Section 413 BNSS, 2023 is analogous to Section 372 CrPC, 1973; accordingly, the ratio of Celestium Financial (that a victim-complainant in a Section 138 case may appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC without electing the route of Section 378(4) CrPC) applies to this appeal.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The complainant should not be burdened with filing the appeal afresh merely because the law has been recently interpreted; the matter is referred to the Sessions Court to be registered as an appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC/413 BNSS, 2023, and if there is any objection whether it is under the CrPC or BNSS, it shall be registered under the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS, 2023, because the CrPC, 1973, has been repealed.

¶24

Key takeaways

The Registry is directed to send the file, along with the Lower Court's Record, if any, to the concerned Sessions Division; leave to appeal is disposed of in the above terms and all pending applications stand disposed of.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Anoop Chitkara J.), CRM-A-1560-2024, decided 05.12.2025: Criminal appeal by the complainant against the trial court's judgment dismissing her cheque-dishonour complaint on merits and acquitting the accused. Counsel prayed for transfer of the appeal to the first Appellate Court in view of the Supreme Court's judgment in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208. Held: Section 413 BNSS, 2023 is analogous to Section 372 CrPC, 1973, and the ratio of Celestium Financial shall apply; since the law has been recently interpreted, the complainant ought not to be burdened with filing the appeal afresh. In the interest of equity, justice and fair play, the matter was referred to the Sessions Court to be registered as an appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC/413 BNSS, 2023 and, in case of any objection as to the applicable code, under the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS, 2023, the CrPC, 1973 having been repealed. Registry directed to send the file with the Lower Court's Record to the concerned Sessions Division. Leave to appeal disposed of; pending applications disposed of. Reportable: No.

¶1

CRM-A-1560-2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

209

¶4

CRM-A-1560-2024 Date of Decision: 05.12.2025

¶5

Anuradha ......Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Gopal Kumar ......Respondent

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶9

Present: Mr. Rohit Kumar Rana, Advocate for the appellant.

¶10

¶11

ANOOP CHITKARA J.

¶12

Criminal No. NACT/61/2019 titled “Anuradha v/s Gopal Kumar” decided on Complaint 23.09.2024

¶13

Feeling aggrieved by the trial court's judgment, dismissing the complaint on merits, and acquitting the accused/respondent, the complainant had come up before this Court by filing the above-mentioned appeal.

¶14

Counsel for the appellant prays for transfer of appeal to the first Appellate Court in view of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in “Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208, decided on 08.04.2025”.

¶15

In Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208, decided on 08.04.2025, Hon’ble Supreme Court holds,

¶16

[7.8] In the case of an offence alleged against an accused under Section 138 of the Act, we are of the view that the complainant is indeed the victim owing to the alleged dishonour of a cheque. In the circumstances, the complainant can proceed as per the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC and he may exercise such an option and he need not then elect to proceed under Section 378 of the CrPC.

¶17

[8]. The right to prefer an appeal is no doubt a statutory right and the right to prefer an appeal by an accused against a conviction is not merely a statutory right but can also be construed to be a fundamental right under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. If that is so, then the right of a victim of an offence to prefer an appeal cannot be equated with the right of the State or the complainant to prefer an appeal. Hence, the statutory rigours for filing of an appeal by the State or by a complainant against an order of acquittal cannot be read into the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC so as to restrict the right of a

¶18

¶19

JYOTI SHARMA 2025.12.09 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh

¶20

CRM-A-1560-2024

¶21

victim to file an appeal on the grounds mentioned therein, when none exists.

¶22

[10]. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC was inserted in the statute book only with effect from 31.12.2009. The object and reason for such insertion must be realised and must be given its full effect to by a court. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the victim of an offence has the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, irrespective of whether he is a complainant or not. Even if the victim of an offence is a complainant, he can still proceed under the proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of the CrPC.

¶23

In BNSS, 2023, S. 413 is analogous to S. 372 CrPC, 1973, and thus the ratio of Celestium Financial shall apply.

¶24

However, the complainant should not face the burden of filing an appeal again before the Sessions Court because the law has been interpreted recently. Therefore, in the interest of Equity, Justice, and Fair play, it would be appropriate to refer this matter to the Sessions Court, where it will be registered as an Appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC/413 BNSS, 2023, as applicable. If there is any objection regarding whether it is an appeal under the CrPC or BNSS, it shall be registered under the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS, 2023, because the CrPC, 1973, has been repealed.

¶25

Given above, the Registry is to send this file along with the Lower Court’s Record, if any, to the concerned Sessions Division.

¶26

Leave to appeal is disposed of in the terms mentioned above. All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

¶27

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 05.12.2025 Jyoti Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No .

¶28

¶29

JYOTI SHARMA 2025.12.09 17:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh

Anuradha v. Gopal Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuradha v. Gopal Kumar

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

Income Tax Officer (Tds), Grand Walk Mall, Ludhiana Vs Jeewandeep Singh Ghai and Another

Kavinder Kumar Vs M/S Webnet Asia

Baljeet Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another

Joginder Singh Vs Kulwant Singh

M/S Captainprecast Situated at Garhi Chajju Road Vs M/S Pavitra Dhaba

Rashmi Garg Vs Jagsir Singh