Harjinder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Harjinder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Leave to appeal disposed of; the matter referred to the Sessions Court for registration as an appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC/413 BNSS, 2023, and under the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS, 2023 if any CrPC-vs-BNSS objection arises; Registry to forward the file with the Trial Court's record to the concerned Sessions Division; pending applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether Section 413 of BNSS, 2023 is analogous to Section 372 of the CrPC, 1973, such that the ratio of Celestium Financial applies. +1 more

Court's answer

Section 413 of BNSS, 2023 is analogous to Section 372 CrPC, 1973, and therefore the ratio of Celestium Financial shall apply.

Ratio / Principle

The complainant should not bear the burden of filing the appeal again; in the interest of equity, justice and fair play, the matter is referred to the Sessions Court to be registered as an appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC/413 BNSS, 2023, as applicable.

Key takeaways

If there is any objection regarding whether the appeal is under the CrPC or the BNSS, it shall be registered under the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS, 2023, because the CrPC, 1973, has been repealed.ratio¶9
The Registry is directed to send this file, along with the Trial Court's record, if any, to the concerned Sessions Division.ratio¶10
Leave to appeal is disposed of in the terms mentioned above; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Order of Anoop Chitkara, J., dated 18.11.2025, in CRM-A-1691-MA-2016 (O&M). Holding that Section 413 of BNSS, 2023 is analogous to Section 372 of the CrPC, 1973, the Court applied the ratio of Celestium Financial relating to a complainant/victim proceeding under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC rather than electing Section 378 CrPC. So that the complainant is not burdened with filing the appeal anew after the recent interpretation of the law, the matter was referred to the Sessions Court for registration as an appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC/413 BNSS, 2023, as applicable; any objection as to whether the appeal falls under the CrPC or the BNSS is to be resolved by registration under the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS, 2023, the CrPC, 1973 having been repealed. The Registry was directed to send the file, with the Trial Court's record if any, to the concerned Sessions Division. Leave to appeal was disposed of in these terms and pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

ARCHANA ARORA

2025.11.19 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

2

CRM-A-1691-MA-2016 (O&M)

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.

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

[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.

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

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.

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

ARCHANA ARORA 2025.11.19 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

3

CRM-A-1691-MA-2016 (O&M)

Leave to appeal is disposed of in the terms mentioned above.

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

18.11.2025 archana Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No

ARCHANA ARORA 2025.11.19 14:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document