M/S Indira Financial Service Ltd. v. M/S Santosh Enterprises and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Sept 2025CRM-A/454/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Leave to appeal; acquittal; Section 378(4) Cr.P.C.; proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C.; Section 2(wa) Cr.P.C. victim; Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881; Section 413 BNSS 2023; complainant; M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 SCC OnLine 1320; CRM-A-454-2021; High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh; Justice Aman Chaudhary; decided 19.09.2025; disposed with direction to treat appeal as under Section 372 Cr.P.C.; Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Faridabad.

What did the court decide?

Application/appeal disposed of by directing the concerned Sessions Judge to treat it as filed under Section 372 Cr.P.C. and assign it to the Court concerned for decision; Registry to transmit the paper-book and trial Court record forthwith and inform the parties. ¶¶7 para 2

M/S Indira Financial Service Ltd. Vs M/S Santosh… — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶7 para 2

Issue for consideration

Whether an application for leave to appeal under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act complaint is to be treated as an appeal maintainable under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C., the complainant being a 'victim' within the meaning of Section 2(wa) Cr.P.C.

¶¶7 para 2

Court's answer

In view of the Supreme Court's holding in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. (2025 SCC OnLine 1320) that an appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act complaint is maintainable under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 413 BNSS 2023), the present appeal is disposed of by directing the concerned Sessions Judge to treat it as having been filed under Section 372 Cr.P.C. and to assign it to the Court concerned for deciding it.

¶¶7 para 2

Ratio / Principle

Registry is directed to send the complete paper-book and trial Court record, if received, along with the said order forthwith, while also informing the parties.

¶¶8 para 3

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Aman Chaudhary, J.), oral order dated 19.09.2025 in CRM-A-454-2021 — M/s Indira Financial Service Ltd (applicant-appellant) v. M/s Santosh Enterprises and Anr. The applicant had preferred an application under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 18.01.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Faridabad, in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Relying on Hon'ble the Supreme Court's decision in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 SCC OnLine 1320 — that an appeal is maintainable under the proviso of Section 372 Cr.P.C. (corresponding Section 413 of BNSS, 2023) against an order of acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act complaint, by treating the complainant as a 'victim' within the meaning of Section 2(wa) Cr.P.C. — the Court disposed of the appeal by directing the concerned Sessions Judge to treat it as having been filed under Section 372 Cr.P.C. and to assign it to the Court concerned for deciding it. The Registry was directed to send the complete paper-book and trial Court record forthwith and inform the parties.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

214 CRM-A-454-2021 D ate of decision: 19.09.2025

¶3

M/S INDIRA F INANCIAL SERVICE LTD ...applicant-appellan t (s) Versus M/S SANTO S H ENTERPRISES AND ANR ...Respondent(s)

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY

¶5

¶6

Present : M r. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for th e applicant-appellant. ********* AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

¶7

1. T h e present application has bee n preferred under Section 378(4 ) of the Code of C riminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘Cr.P.C.’) seeking gran t of leave to appe a l against the judgment of acqui t tal dated 18.01.2021 passed by the learned Judic i al Magistrate 1^st Class, Faridabad, in a complaint filed u n der Section 138 o f the Negotiable Instruments Ac t , 1881 (hereinafter ‘NI Act’). 2. H on’ble the Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. , 2025 SCC OnLine 1320 , held that an appeal is maintain a ble under the pro v iso of Section 372 Cr.P.C. (co r responding Section 413 of BNSS, 2023) against an order of acquittal passed in a complaint under Section 138 NI Act, by treati n g the complainant therein, as a ‘victim’ within the meaning u n der Section 2 (wa ) of Cr.P.C, in view of which, t h e present appeal is disposed o f by directing the c oncerned Sessions Judge, for t reating it to have been filed u n der Section 372 o f Cr.P.C. and assigning the sam e to the Court concerned for de c iding it.

¶8

R egistry is directed to send the c o mplete paper-book and trial C o urt record, if rece i ved, along with the said order f orthwith, while also informing the parties.

¶9

19.09.2025	(A MAN	CHAUDHARY)
ashok		JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned	: Y es / No
Whether reportable	: Y es / No

¶10

ASHOK KUMAR 2025.09.19 17:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

M/S Indira Financial Service Ltd. v. M/S Santosh Enterprises and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Indira Financial Service Ltd. v. M/S Santosh Enterprises and Anr.

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

Vishal Marwah Vs State of Haryana

Vipin Vs State of Haryana

Amarjeet Singh Vs Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. and Anr.

Manish Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Kunda Hari Babu Vs State of Punjab and Others

Suresh Kundu Vs State of Haryana