Krishan Lal Vs Anil Gulati — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Krishan Lal Vs Anil Gulati — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application for leave to appeal treated as an appeal under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and remanded to the concerned learned Sessions Judge (who may retain it or assign it to another competent Court); Registry directed to transmit the order with copy of complete paper-book and return the trial Court record; legal representatives of the deceased applicant impleaded and amended memo of parties taken on record; pending applications disposed of; matter finally 'Disposed of accordingly'.

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

The question raised is no longer res integra: adopting the Hon'ble Supreme Court's authoritative ruling in M/s Celestium Financial, 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. and is entitled to pursue an appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. without seeking special leave under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C.

Ratio / Principle

Guided by a pragmatic and justice-oriented approach, this Court directed that the present appeal be treated as one authoritatively instituted under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C.

Key takeaways

The present application seeking leave to appeal was remanded back to the concerned learned Sessions Judge with a direction to treat the same as an appeal filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C.; the learned Sessions Judge may retain the appeal on his/her Board or assign it to some other Court of competent jurisdiction.ratio¶20
On application CRM-35071-2025, the legal representatives of the appellant (since deceased) were ordered to be impleaded, subject to just exceptions, and the amended memo of parties was taken on record, permitting the proceedings to continue.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Leave to appeal against acquittal (dated 05.12.2016, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kaithal) in a Section 138 NI Act cheque-dishonour complaint. Held, following M/s Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 INSC 804 : 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208, that the issue is no longer res integra: a complainant in a Section 138 NI Act prosecution qualifies as a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) Cr.P.C. and may appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. without special leave under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the leave application was directed to be treated as an appeal instituted under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. and remanded to the learned Sessions Judge; legal representatives of the deceased applicant were impleaded (CRM-35071-2025 allowed) and the amended memo of parties taken on record.

CRM-A-94-MA-2017 (O&M)

1

126+275

CRM-A-94-MA-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.09.2025

Krishan Lal (since deceased) through his LRs ...Applicant Versus Anil Gulati ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present: Mr. Ravi Dutt Sharma, Advocate, for the applicant.

AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (ORAL)

CRM-35071-2025

By virtue of the present application, legal representatives of the applicant, Krishan Lal have sought permission of the Court, to allow them to continue further with the present appeal. As per applicants, during pendency of the present appeal, Sh. Krishan Lal passed away leaving behind them as his legal heirs. The application is supported by the death certificate of late Krishan Lal.

In view of the averments made in the application, the same is allowed and legal representatives of the appellant who has since died, are ordered to be impleaded through him, subject to just exceptions, if any.

Amended Memo of parties is taken on record.

CRM-A-94-MA-2017

The applicant has filed the present application seeking grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 05.12.2016 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kaithal in a case stemming from complaint dated 17.04.2014/02.01.2015 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 PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.09.06 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-A-94-MA-2017 (O&M)

2

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 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) 03.09.2025 JUDGE Parveen kumar

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

PARVEEN KUMAR 2025.09.06 11:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document