268. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Kanchan Bala Amarjit Kaur CORAM: Present: MANJARI NEHRU KAUL 1. leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed in a complaint case instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘NI Act’), whereby the complaint filed b applicant was dismissed and the accused was acquitted. 2. proceedings is whether an appeal against an order of acquittal passed in a complaint case under Section 138 of the NI Act can be the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. at the instance of the complainant? 3. Financial Vs. A. (Criminal) 208’ complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act, qualifies as a IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM Date of decision: Kanchan Bala Versus Amarjit Kaur HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Mr.Vivek Singla, Advocate, for the applicant. ----- MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) The applicant has filed the present application seeking grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed in a complaint case instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘NI Act’), whereby the complaint filed b applicant was dismissed and the accused was acquitted. 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 the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. at the instance of the complainant? The issue is no longer res integra Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804 (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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-A-10-2025 Date of decision: 23.07.2025 .... Applicant .... Respondent HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL , Advocate, for the applicant. the present application seeking grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed in a complaint case instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘NI Act’), whereby the complaint filed by the applicant was dismissed and the accused was acquitted. 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? res integra. In ‘M/s Celestium Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804: 2025(3) RCR ourt authoritatively held that a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act, qualifies as a the present application seeking grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed in a complaint case instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 y the The limited question arising for consideration in the present proceedings is whether an appeal against an order of acquittal passed in a entertained under ‘M/s Celestium : 2025(3) RCR ourt authoritatively held that a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act, qualifies as a SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.24 08:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-10-2025 - 2 - ‘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. 4. 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. 5. In view of the authoritative pronouncement in M/s Celestium Financial's case (supra) and the view taken by this Court also in subsequent cases including in Rajat Deep Versus Prince, CRM-A-1320- MA-2016, disposed off on 21.07.2025, the present application is disposed of with a direction that the learned Sessions Judge concerned shall treat the present appeal as an appeal filed under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and assign the same to an appropriate Court for disposal on merits, in accordance with law. 6. The concerned Appellate Court shall proceed to decide the appeal expeditiously, without being impeded by any delay in filing the appeal, in view of the legal position now clarified by the Hon'ble Apex Court. SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.24 08:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-A-10-2025 - 3 - 7. 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. 8. Disposed of accordingly. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE July 23, 2025 sanjeev Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No SANJEEV KUMAR 2025.07.24 08:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document