Remanded¶36

M/S Shree Vishnu Traders v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Aug 2025CRM-A/873/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Punjab & Haryana High Court; CRM-A-873-2024 (O&M); M/s Shree Vishnu Traders v. State of Haryana; Section 138 NI Act; acquittal dated 13.03.2024 by JMFC Kalka; cheque Rs.28,50,000; Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208; victim's right to appeal under Section 372 Cr.P.C. versus leave under Section 378(4); remanded to Sessions Judge Panchkula; decided 26.08.2025; Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.

What did the court decide?

Application seeking leave to appeal remanded to the learned Sessions Judge, Panchkula with direction to treat it as an appeal filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and entrust it to the appropriate Court for disposal on merits; Registry directed to send complete paper-book and record forthwith; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of. ¶36

M/S Shree Vishnu Traders Vs State of Haryana and… — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant's application seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal dated 13.03.2024 should be treated as an appeal under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. before the Court of Session (per Celestium Financial) rather than requiring special leave under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C.

¶36

Court's answer

In view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in Celestium Financial, the present application seeking leave to appeal is remanded to the learned Sessions Judge, Panchkula with a direction to treat the same as an appeal filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and entrust the same to appropriate Court for its disposal on merits.

¶36

Ratio / Principle

The Registry is directed to send the complete paper-book and the record of the case to the learned Sessions Judge, Panchkula forthwith.

¶37

Key takeaways

The application stands disposed of accordingly, and pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.ratio¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRM-A-873-2024 (O&M) — High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, decided 26.08.2025 by Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J. (Oral). M/s Shree Vishnu Traders (applicant) challenged the judgment of acquittal dated 13.03.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kalka, in a complaint dated 12.11.2018 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 arising from dishonour of a cheque of Rs.28,50,000/-. Relying on the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208 — that a victim has an absolute, unconditional right to prefer an appeal under Section 372 Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions, and insistence on special leave under Section 378(4) would be contrary to Parliament's intent — the Court remanded the present application seeking leave to appeal to the learned Sessions Judge, Panchkula, with a direction to treat it as an appeal filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and entrust it to the appropriate Court for disposal on merits; the Registry was directed to send the complete paper-book and record forthwith; pending miscellaneous applications stood disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

242

¶3

CRM-A-873-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.08.2025

¶4

M/s Shree Vishnu Traders

¶5

..Applicant

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

State of Haryana and others

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ

¶10

Present :- Mr. H.S. Kasan, Advocate, for the applicant.

¶11

Ms. Chhavi Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

¶12

¶13

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

¶14

Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment of acquittal dated 13.03.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kalka, in a case stemming from complaint dated 12.11.2018 filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶15

The complaint (supra) was filed on the ground of dishonour of cheque of Rs.28,50,000/-. After assessing all the material available on the record, the learned trial Court acquitted the respondent(s) vide judgment dated 13.03.2024.

¶16

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208 , after considerable discussion and comparative interpretation of Sections 372 and 378(4) of Cr.P.C., concluded that the victim has a right to file an appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions. Speaking through Justice B.V. Nagarathna, the following was held:

¶17

SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.08.29 15:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

¶19

242

¶20

CRM-A-873-2024 (O&M)

¶21

“ 7.12 The reasons for the above distinction are not far to see and can be elaborated as follows:

¶22

Firstly , the victim of a crime must have an absolute right to prefer an appeal which cannot be circumscribed by any condition precedent. In the instant case, a victim under Section 138 of the Act, i.e., a payee or the holder of a cheque is a person who has suffered the impact of the offence committed by a person who is charged of the offence, namely, the accused, whose cheque has been dishonoured.

¶23

Secondly , the right of a victim of a crime must be placed on par with the right of an accused who has suffered a conviction, who, as a matter of right can prefer an appeal under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C. A person convicted of a crime has the right to prefer an appeal under Section 374 as a matter of right and not being subjected to any conditions. Similarly, a victim of a crime, whatever be the nature of the crime, unconditionally must have a right to prefer an appeal.

¶24

Thirdly , it is for this reason that the Parliament thought it fit to insert the proviso to sub-section 372 without mandating any condition precedent to be fulfilled by the victim of an offence, which expression also includes the legal representatives of a deceased victim who can prefer an appeal.

¶25

On the contrary, as against an order of acquittal, the State, through the Public Prosecutor can prefer an appeal even if the complainant does not prefer such an appeal, though of course

¶26

SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.08.29 15:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶27

¶28

CRM-A-873-2024 (O&M)

¶29

242

¶30

such an appeal is with the leave of the court. However, it is not always necessary for the State or a complainant to prefer an appeal. But when it comes to a victim’s right to prefer an appeal, the insistence on seeking special leave to appeal from the High Court under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. would be contrary to what has been intended by the Parliament by insertion of the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C.

¶31

Fourthly , the Parliament has not amended Section 378 to circumscribe the victim’s right to prefer an appeal just as it has with regard to a complainant or the State filing an appeal. On the other hand, the Parliament has inserted the proviso to Section 372 so as to envisage a superior right for the victim of an offence to prefer an appeal on the grounds mentioned therein as compared to a complainant.

¶32

Fifthly , the involvement of the State in respect of an offence under Section 138 of the Act is conspicuous by its absence. This is because the complaint filed under that provision is in the nature of a private complaint as per Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 143 of the Act by an express intention incorporates the provisions of the Cr.P.C. in the matter of trial of such a deemed offence tried as a criminal offence. Therefore, the complainant, who is the victim of a dishonour of cheque must be construed to be victim in terms of the proviso to Section 372 read with the definition of victim under Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C.”

¶33

SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.08.29 15:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶34

¶35

242 CRM-A-873-2024 (O&M)

¶36

Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in Celestium Financial (supra) , the present application seeking leave to appeal is remanded to the learned Sessions Judge, Panchkula with a direction to treat the same as an appeal filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and entrust the same to appropriate Court for its disposal on merits.

¶37

The Registry is directed to send the complete paper-book and the record of the case to the learned Sessions Judge, Panchkula forthwith.

¶38

Disposed of accordingly. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶39

(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) 26.08.2025 JUDGE Sumit Gusain Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶40

SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.08.29 15:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

M/S Shree Vishnu Traders v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Shree Vishnu Traders v. State of Haryana and Ors.

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

Ram Nath Vs Dharinder Kumar Sabherwal and Another

Mandeep Sharma Vs Hans Raj

Balwinder Singh Vs M/S Gurdev Enterprises and Another

Krishan Lal Vs Trilochan Singh

Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi Vs State of Punjab

Sudesh Kumar Vs Satpal Kajal