Premjee Motor Finance Co. Vs Teja Khan — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Premjee Motor Finance Co. Vs Teja Khan — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed in the terms stated: matter referred to the Sessions Court to be registered as an appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC / S. 413 BNSS, 2023 (BNSS prevails on any objection, the CrPC, 1973 having been repealed); Registry to send the file with the Trial Court's Record, if any, to the concerned Sessions Division; all pending applications, if any, stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Celestium Financial and S. 413 BNSS, 2023 being analogous to S. 372 CrPC, 1973, the complainant's appeal against acquittal can be dealt with as a victim's appeal under the proviso to S. 372 CrPC / S. 413 BNSS instead of under S. 378(4) CrPC. +1 more

Court's answer

S. 413 BNSS, 2023 is analogous to S. 372 CrPC, 1973, and accordingly the ratio of Celestium Financial applies to the complainant's appeal.

Ratio / Principle

Because the law has been interpreted only recently, the complainant should not face the burden of filing the appeal again before the Sessions Court; in the interest of Equity, Justice and Fair play, the matter is referred to the Sessions Court for registration as an appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC / S. 413 BNSS, 2023.

Key takeaways

On any objection 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the CrPC or the BNSS, it shall be registered under the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS, 2023, because the CrPC, 1973, has been repealed.ratio¶27
The Registry is directed to send this file, along with the Trial Court's Record, if any, to the concerned Sessions Division.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Complainant-appellant Premjee Motor Finance Co.'s application for leave to appeal (with appeal CRA-AS-163-2018) against the trial court's 24.10.2016 judgment dismissing its complaint on merits and acquitting the accused Teja Khan. Relying on the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208, decided 08.04.2025), the Court held that S. 413 BNSS, 2023 is analogous to S. 372 CrPC, 1973 and that the ratio of Celestium Financial applies: a complainant who is the victim of an alleged cheque-dishonour offence may proceed under the proviso to S. 372 CrPC / S. 413 BNSS and need not elect the S. 378(4) route. Since that interpretation is recent, the Court declined to make the complainant file afresh and referred the matter to the Sessions Court for registration as an appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC / S. 413 BNSS, 2023; any objection between the CrPC and BNSS routes is to be resolved in favour of the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS, 2023 as the CrPC, 1973 has been repealed. Registry directed to forward the file with the Trial Court's record, if any, to the concerned Sessions Division. Appeal disposed; pending applications closed. Whether reportable: No.

CRA-AS-163-2018

-1-

208 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRA-AS-163-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.01.2026

Premjee Motor Finance Co.

......Appellant

Versus

Teja Khan

......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present: Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Nagar Singh, Advocate for the respondent.

ANOOP CHITKARA J.

Criminal 28 of 11.12.2014/08.01.2015 Complaint Decided on: 24.10.2016

Feeling aggrieved by the trial court's judgment, dismissing the complaint on merits, and acquitÝng the accused/respondent, the complainant had come up before this Court by filing the above-mentioned application for leave to appeal accompanying the appeal.

Counsel for the applicant prays for transfer of appeal to the first Appellate Court in view of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in “Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208 , decided on 08.04.2025”.

In Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208, decided on 08.04.2025 , Hon’ble Supreme Court holds,

[7.8] In the case of an offence alleged against an accused under Section 138 of the Act, we are of the view that the complainant is indeed the victim 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

SONIA BURA 2026.01.27 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRA-AS-163-2018

-2-

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.

Appeal is disposed of in the terms mentioned above. All pending application(s), if any, stand closed.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

23.01.2026 sonia Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No .

SONIA BURA 2026.01.27 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document