Parveen Kumar Vs Rajinder Kumar — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Parveen Kumar Vs Rajinder Kumar — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The leave-to-appeal application was disposed of with a direction that it be treated as an appeal instituted under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. and remanded to the concerned learned Sessions Judge (who may retain it on his/her Board or assign it to another Court of competent jurisdiction); the Registry was directed to transmit the order with the complete paper-book and return the trial Court record, if received, to the learned Sessions Judge; pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

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., at the instance of the complainant without requiring special leave under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C.

Ratio / Principle

In view of Celestium Financial (supra), the application seeking leave to appeal is remanded to the concerned learned Sessions Judge with a direction to treat it as an appeal filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C.; the Sessions Judge may retain the appeal on his/her Board or assign it to some other Court of competent jurisdiction.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (Aaradhna Sawhney, J.) | CRM-A-546-2019, decided 08.09.2025 — Application seeking leave to appeal against a judgment of acquittal dated 17.12.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kharar, in a complaint dated 25.04.2016 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Issue: whether a complainant's appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act case lies under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. Relying on M/s Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 INSC 804 : 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208, wherein the Supreme Court held that a Section 138 NI Act complainant qualifies as a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) Cr.P.C. and is entitled to appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. without seeking special leave under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C., this Court directed that the present application be treated as an appeal authoritatively instituted under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. and remanded it to the concerned learned Sessions Judge, who may retain it on his/her Board or assign it to another Court of competent jurisdiction; the Registry was directed to transmit the order with the complete paper-book and return the trial Court record. Disposed of accordingly; pending application(s), if any, also disposed of.

CRM-A-546-2019

1

232 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM-A-546-2019 Date of Decision:08.09.2025

Parveen Kumar

...Applicant

Versus

Rajinder Kumar

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY

Present: Mr. H.S. Dhillon, Advocate for the applicant.

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (ORAL)

The applicant has filed the present application seeking grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 17.12.2018 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kharar, in a case stemming from complaint dated 25.04.2016 filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter ‘NI Act’).

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

PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.09.10 13:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-A-546-2019

2

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.

Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in Celestium Financial (supra), the present application seeking leave to appeal is remanded back to the concerned learned Sessions Judge with a direction to treat the same as appeal filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. Learned Sessions Judge may retain the said appeal on his/her Board or assign it to some other Court of competent jurisdiction.

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, concerned.

Disposed of accordingly.

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(AARADHNA SAWHNEY) 08.09.2025 JUDGE

Parveen kumar

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

PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.09.10 13:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document