IN THE 271 Rajesh Jain Sandeep Mehra 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 under Section Act’). 2. Gnanasekaran Etc 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 th 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 Aro rule of thumb, judgments rendered shall be applicable retrospectively. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: VERSUS Sandeep Mehra HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR None. **** 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 Judicial Magistrate 1 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 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 th 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 applicable retrospectively. HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-A-26- 2022(O&M) Date of Decision: August 05, 2025 .....Appellant VERSUS .....Respondent HARPREET SINGH BRAR 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 15.02.2021 1st Class Jind, in a complaint filed 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter ‘NI The Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. ., 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 ra 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 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘CR.P.C.’) 15.02.2021 in a complaint filed (hereinafter ‘NI M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. , 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 is 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, 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. 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 t appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge, 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 pap 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 t appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge, Jind 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, Jind, 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 direction to treat the same as filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C and entrust it to 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