IN THE 317 The Lehragaga Primary Co Kuldeep Singh CORAM: Present : HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. 378(4) of the Code of seeking grant of leave to appeal the passed by the learned complaint filed under (hereinafter ‘NI Act’) 2. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208 deliberation and comparative analysis of Sections 372 and 378(4) of Cr.P.C., concluded that Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions. Reliance in this regard can also be placed on Satish Kumar Versus Jugal Kishor decided on 02.07.2025. Further still, applying the doc overruling, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Intelligence Vs. Raj Kumar Arora in SCC Online 819 rule of thumb, judgments rendered shall be applicable retrospectively. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: The Lehragaga Primary Co-operative Agriculture Development Bank Ltd. VERSUS Kuldeep Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Akshay Bansal, Advocate for the appellant **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) The present application has been preferred under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘CR.P.C.’) seeking grant of leave to appeal the judgment passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate complaint filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments A (hereinafter ‘NI Act’). The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208 deliberation and comparative analysis 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. Reliance in this regard can also be Satish Kumar Versus Jugal Kishor decided on 02.07.2025. Further still, applying the doc overruling, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Intelligence Vs. Raj Kumar Arora in SCC Online 819 rule of thumb, judgments rendered shall be applicable retrospectively. HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-A-5828-MA-2018 Date of Decision: August 05, 2025 operative Agriculture Development Bank Ltd. .....Appellant VERSUS .....Respondent HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Akshay Bansal, Advocate for the appellant. The present application has been preferred under Section Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘CR.P.C.’) judgment of acquittal dated 28.09.2018 Judicial Magistrate Moonak, in a 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208, after considerable deliberation and comparative analysis of Sections 372 and 378(4) of Cr.P.C., the victim has a right to file an appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions. Reliance in this regard can also be Satish Kumar Versus Jugal Kishor in CRM-A-2700-MA-2018 decided on 02.07.2025. Further still, applying the doctrine of prospective overruling, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Vs. Raj Kumar Arora in SCC Online 819 has clarified that as a rule of thumb, judgments rendered shall be applicable retrospectively. , 2025 Appellant .....Respondent The present application has been preferred under Section Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘CR.P.C.’) 28.09.2018 in a ct, 1881 M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. , after considerable deliberation and comparative analysis of Sections 372 and 378(4) of Cr.P.C., the victim has a right to file an appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions. Reliance in this regard can also be 2018 trine of prospective Directorate of Revenue has clarified that as a PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.08.06 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3. in Celestium Financial appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge, direction to treat the same as filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C entrust it to appropriate Court for its disposal on merits. 4. the record of the case 5. 6. of. August 05, 2025 P.C 2 Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court Celestium Financial (supra), the present application seeking leave to appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge, direction to treat the same as filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C entrust it to appropriate Court for its disposal on merits. The Registry is directed to send the complete paper the record of the case to the learned Sessions Judge, Disposed of, accordingly. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned. : Whether Reportable. : of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court (supra), the present application seeking leave to appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge, Sangrur with a direction to treat the same as filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C and entrust it to appropriate Court for its disposal on merits. The Registry is directed to send the complete paper-book and to the learned Sessions Judge, Sangrur, forthwith. neous applications, if any, also stand disposed (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court (supra), the present application seeking leave to with a and book and neous applications, if any, also stand disposed (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.08.06 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document