Mool Chand Vs Keshav Phutela — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Mool Chand Vs Keshav Phutela — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of with a direction that the learned Sessions Judge concerned treat the present appeal as an appeal filed under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and assign it to an appropriate Court for disposal on merits in accordance with law; the Appellate Court to decide the appeal expeditiously without being impeded by any delay in filing; the Registry to transmit the order with a copy of 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

Adopting a pragmatic and justice-oriented approach, the Court directed that the present appeal be treated as one authoritatively instituted under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., i.e., an appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act complaint case is entertainable at the complainant's instance under the said proviso without special leave under Section 378(4).

Ratio / Principle

Acting on the legal position authoritatively clarified by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial (supra), the Court proceeded on the basis 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 dishonour of a cheque, and is entitled to pursue an appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 without special leave under Section 378(4).

Key takeaways

The concerned Appellate Court is 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.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (Manjari Nehru Kaul, J., oral), CRM-A-166-2020, decided 28.07.2025 — Leave to appeal: complainant Mool Chan sought leave to appeal against the acquittal of accused Keshav Phutela in a complaint case under Section 138 of the NI Act. Held, the issue being covered by the authoritative pronouncement in M/s Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 INSC 804 : 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208, and the view taken by this Court in Rajat Deep v. Prince, CRM-A-1320MA-2016, a complainant in a Section 138 NI Act prosecution qualifies as a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) Cr.P.C. and may pursue an appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. without special leave under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C.; the application was disposed of with a direction to treat the appeal as instituted under the proviso to Section 372, assign it to an appropriate Court for expeditious disposal on merits uninhibited by delay in filing, and for the Registry to transmit the order with the paper-book and return the Trial Court record to the learned Sessions Judge.

260. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-A-166-2020 Date of decision: 28.07.2025

Mool Chan d .... Applicant

Versus

Keshav Ph u tela

.... Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present: Mr. Priyanshu Kamra, Advoca t e, for the applicant.

None for the respondent.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL)

The applicant has filed the pre s ent application seeking grant o f leave to ap p eal against the judgment of acq u ittal passed in a complaint cas e instituted u nder Section 138 of the Ne g otiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘NI Act’), whe r eby the complaint filed by th e applicant w a s dismissed and the accused w a s acquitted.

The limited question arising f or consideration in the presen t proceeding s is whether an appeal against a n order of acquittal passed in a complaint c ase under Section 138 of the N I Act can be entertained unde r the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. at t he instance of the complainant? 3. The issue is no longer re s integra . In ‘M/s Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804: 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208’ , the Hon'ble Supreme Cou r t authoritatively held that a

SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.29 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-A-166-2020 - 2 -

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 pursue an appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., without the requirement of seeking special leave under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C.

Adopting a pragmatic and justice oriented approach and guided by the principle that procedural rule must serve and not obstruct the course of justice, 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 subsequent cases including in Rajat Deep Versus Prince, CRM-A-1320MA-2016 , disposed off 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

SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.29 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-A-166-2020 - 3 -

of the complete paper-book and return the Trial Court record, if received, to

the learned Sessions Judge.

Disposed of accordingly.

(MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE July 28, 2025 sanjeev Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.29 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document