Victim’s right of appeal in cheque dishonour cases Paras 4, 5 The Court held that a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, who is also a victim, is entitled to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, it was observed that such right of appeal extends even to cases arising out of cheque dishonour.

advocatemmmohan

(A) Criminal Procedure Code – Section 372 proviso – Victim’s right of appeal in cheque dishonour cases

Paras 4, 5

The Court held that a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, who is also a victim, is entitled to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, it was observed that such right of appeal extends even to cases arising out of cheque dishonour.

---

(B) Appeal against acquittal in Section 138 N.I. Act – Proper forum

Paras 3, 5

The Court held that where a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is dismissed for default and the accused is acquitted, the complainant cannot directly invoke Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. before the High Court if he falls within the category of “victim”. In such circumstances, the proper remedy is to file an appeal before the Sessions Court under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C.

---

(C) Dismissal for non-prosecution – Effect

Para 3

The Court noted that dismissal of a complaint for want of prosecution results in acquittal of the accused. Such acquittal can be challenged by the complainant through the statutory appellate mechanism provided under law.

---

(D) Jurisdiction – High Court vs Sessions Court

Paras 5, 6

The Court clarified that where a statutory remedy is specifically provided before the Sessions Court under Section 372 proviso Cr.P.C., the High Court should not entertain the appeal. The appropriate course is to direct the appellant to approach the competent Sessions Court.

---

(E) Procedural direction – Return of appeal papers

Para 6

The Court directed the Registry to return the appeal papers along with delay condonation application to the appellant, enabling him to present the same before the competent Sessions Court within the stipulated period. It was further directed that upon such representation, the Sessions Court shall consider the appeal and delay condonation petition in accordance with law.

---

FINAL DISPOSITION

Paras 6, 7

The appeal was returned with liberty to the appellant to present it before the concerned Sessions Court within four weeks. The Sessions Court was directed to proceed in accordance with law.