14-alp-373-2018-app-536-2019.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 373 OF 2018 (Leave to file appeal) WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 536 OF 2019 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1028 OF 2018 Jerome Hillary Rodrigues … Applicant vs. Dexter Teddy Miranda and Anr … Respondents Ms. Asmeeta Bhoir h/f Mr. Shailesh Kankaria for the Applicant Mr. D.J. Haldankar, APP for Respondent-State. CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 7th NOVEMBER 2025 ORDER: 1. These applications are filed under Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code (‘CrPC’) by the original complainant for leave to file an appeal against the order dated 20th August 2016, passed by the learned Magistrate, dismissing the complaint as the complainant remained absent. The complaint was filed for the offence punishable under Sections 504 and 506, read with Section Page no. 1 of 4 varsha VARSHA VIJAY RAJGURU Digitally signed by VARSHA VIJAY RAJGURU Date: 2025.11.17 19:15:59 +0530 14-alp-373-2018-app-536-2019.doc 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In view of the dismissal of the complaint, the accused is acquitted. 2. After the complaint was dismissed, the applicant filed the revision application before the sessions court. The revision application was dismissed as not maintainable, and the complainant was directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 10,000/- towards the cost payable to the respondent-accused. Thereafter, the present application is filed along with the Criminal Application No. 536 of 2019, for condonation of the delay in filing the application. The applicant filed Criminal Application No. 1028 of 2018 seeking a stay to the order passed by the Sessions Court directing the complainant to pay the cost. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in view of the legal principles settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Celestium Financial Versus. A. Gnanasekaran1, the applicant, would be covered under the definition of ‘victim’ and thus, would be entitled to file an appeal under the proviso of Section 372 of the CrPC before the sessions court. She, therefore, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw the application with liberty to file an appeal before the sessions court. She further submits that the applicant be granted the benefit of the period of pendency of this application for seeking 1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320 Page no. 2 of 4 14-alp-373-2018-app-536-2019.doc condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the sessions court. 4. In view of the legal principles settled in the decision of the M/s. Celestium Financial, the applicant, would fall within the definition of the expression ‘victim’ and thus would be entitled to file an appeal before the sessions court under Section 372 of the CrPC. The applicant is therefore granted leave to file an appeal before the sessions court under Section 372 of the CrPC against the order dated 20th August 2016, dismissing the complaint by the learned Magistrate. 5. It is clarified that the applicant would be entitled to seek benefit of the period of pendency of this application for seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the sessions court, subject to the applicant depositing the amount of cost as per the order dated 26th July 2018, passed by the sessions court in Criminal Revision Application No. 653 of 2017 and subject to filing of appeal within eight weeks from today. 6. It is clarified that if both conditions are not satisfied, the applicant would not be entitled to seek the benefit of the period of pendency of this application for seeking condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the sessions court. 7. The Criminal Application No. 373 of 2018 and Criminal Page no. 3 of 4 14-alp-373-2018-app-536-2019.doc Application No. 536 of 2019 are disposed of as withdrawn, subject to the aforesaid liberty. 8. In view of the aforesaid order, Criminal Application No. 1028 of 2018 is disposed of as infructuous. 9. Learned advocate for the applicant is permitted to take back a certified copy of the impugned order for filing the appeal in the Sessions Court, on submitting a photocopy of the impugned order. Registry shall verify the photocopy and return the certified copy to the learned advocate for the applicant. (GAURI GODSE, J.) Page no. 4 of 4