1. leave to appeal the judgment of acquittal dated learned Judicial Magistrate complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter ‘NI Act’) 2. proceedings is whether an appeal against an order of acquittal passed in a complaint case the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. at the instance of the complainant? 3. Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804: 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208’ complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act, qualifies Appellant has filed the present application leave to appeal the judgment of acquittal dated learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kaithal complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter ‘NI Act’). 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? The issue is no longer res integra Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804: 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208’, the Hon'ble Supreme Court authoritatively held that a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act, qualifies has filed the present application seeking grant of leave to appeal the judgment of acquittal dated 23.09.2014 passed by the Kaithal, in a case stemming from a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, The limited question arising for consideration in the present proceedings is whether an appeal against an order of acquittal passed in a 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 res integra. In ‘M/s Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804: 2025(3) RCR , the Hon'ble Supreme Court authoritatively held that a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act, qualifies seeking grant of passed by the a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, The limited question arising for consideration in the present proceedings is whether an appeal against an order of acquittal passed in a 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 ‘M/s Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804: 2025(3) RCR , the Hon'ble Supreme Court authoritatively held that a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the NI Act, qualifies RAJ KUMAR 2025.08.12 20:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document/judgment as a ‘victim’ under Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C., being the person who suffers financial loss due to the dishonou 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. 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. Court in leave to appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge, with a direction to treat the same as Cr.P.C. Learned Sessions Judge may retain the said appeal on his/her Board or assign it to some other Court of competent jurisdiction 6. copy of the complete paper received, to the learned Sessions Judge, concerned 7. 8. as a ‘victim’ under Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C., being the person who suffers financial loss due to the dishonou 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 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 viso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in Celestium Financial (supra), the present application seeking leave to appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge, with a direction to treat the same as appeal Learned Sessions Judge may retain the said appeal on his/her Board or assign it to some other Court of competent jurisdiction The Registry is directed to transmit t copy of the complete paper-book and return the received, to the learned Sessions Judge, concerned Disposed of accordingly. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. -2- as a ‘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. c 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 Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex , the present application seeking leave to appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge, Kaithal, appeal filed under Section 372 of the Learned Sessions Judge may retain the said appeal on his/her Board or assign it to some other Court of competent jurisdiction. The Registry is directed to transmit this order along with book and return the trial Court record, if received, to the learned Sessions Judge, concerned. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. as a ‘victim’ under Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C., being the person who r 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 c 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 Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex , the present application seeking , filed under Section 372 of the Learned Sessions Judge may retain the said appeal on his/her his order along with rial Court record, if RAJ KUMAR 2025.08.12 20:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document/judgment