IN THE 268 Ombir Bhadana M/s SRS Knowledge CORAM: Present : HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘CR.P.C.’) seeking grant of leave to appeal the passed by the learned filed under Act’). 2. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208 deliberation and comparative analysis of Sections 372 and 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 placed on Satish Kumar Versus Jugal Kishor decided on 02.07.2025. Further still, applying the doctrine of prospective overruling, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Intelligence Vs. Raj Kumar Arora in SCC Online 819 rule of thumb, judgments rendered shall be 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: Ombir Bhadana VERSUS M/s SRS Knowledge and Technologies Ltd and another HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Ram Bilas Gupta, Advocate for the appellant **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) The present application has been preferred 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 Judicial Magistrate 1st filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208 deliberation and comparative analysis of Sections 372 and 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 doctrine of prospective overruling, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Intelligence Vs. Raj Kumar Arora in SCC Online 819 rule of thumb, judgments rendered shall be HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-A-403-2021(O&M) Date of Decision: August 05, 2025 .....Appellant VERSUS and Technologies Ltd and another .....Respondent HARPREET SINGH BRAR , Advocate for the appellant. The present application has been preferred under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘CR.P.C.’) judgment of acquittal dated 25.01.2021 st Class Faridabad, in a complaint 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter ‘NI 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., 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 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 applicable retrospectively. , 2025 Appellant .....Respondents under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘CR.P.C.’) 25.01.2021 in a complaint (hereinafter ‘NI M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. , after considerable 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 2018 decided on 02.07.2025. Further still, applying the doctrine 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 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 and 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. : Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court (supra), the present application seeking leave to appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge, Faridabad with a 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, Faridabad, forthwith. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court (supra), the present application seeking leave to with a treat the same as filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C and book and Pending miscellaneous 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