HALONIXTECHNOLOGIESPVTLTD v. KESHAV
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 2(wa), 378(4)
Judgment
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFDELHIATNEWDELHI+CRL.L.P.465/2024&CRL.M.A.29889/2024HALONIXTECHNOLOGIESPVTLTD.....PetitionerThrough: None.versusKESHAV.....RespondentThrough: None.CORAM:HON'BLEMR.JUSTICEMANOJKUMAROHRIORDER%16.10.20251.ThepresentpetitionhasbeenfiledunderSection378(4)Cr.P.C.bythepetitioner/complainantseekingleavetoappealagainstthejudgementdated11.07.2024passedbylearnedJMFC,NIAct, PatialaHouseCourtsinthecasebearingCCNo.39659/2016titledas‘HALONIXTECHNOLOGIESPVTLTDv.KESHAV’,videwhichtherespondentwasacquittedoftheoffenseunderSection138NIAct.
TheattentionofthisCourtisdrawntotherecentdecisionoftheSupremeCourtinCelestiumFinancialvsA.Gnanasekaranetc, reportedas2025SCCOnLineSC1320wherein, ithasbeenheldthatthecomplainantunderSection138NIAct, whosuffersfinanciallossandinjuryonaccountofthedishonourofcheque, wouldqualifyasavictimwithinthemeaningofSection2(wa)Cr.P.C.ItwasfurtherheldthatsuchacomplainantcouldmaintainanappealunderprovisotoSection372CrPCinhisownright, withoutcomplyingwith This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/11/2025 at 11:28:04 therigoursofSection378(4)CrPC.Therelevantportionisextractedhereunder:-“7.7InthecontextofoffencesundertheAct, particularlyunderSection138ofthesaidAct, thecomplainantisclearlytheaggrievedpartywhohassufferedeconomiclossandinjuryduetothedefaultinpaymentbytheaccusedowingtothedishonourofthechequewhichisdeemedtobeanoffenceunderthatprovision.
Insuchcircumstances, itwouldbejust, reasonableandinconsonancewiththespiritoftheCrPCtoholdthatthecomplainantundertheActalsoqualifiesasavictimwithinthemeaningofSection2(wa)oftheCrPC.Consequently, suchacomplainantoughttobeextendedthebenefitoftheprovisotoSection372,therebyenablinghimtomaintainanappealagainstanorderofacquittalinhisownrightwithouthavingtoseekspecialleaveunderSection378(4)oftheCrPC.xxx7.9Inthiscontext, wewishtostatethattheprovisotoSection372doesnotmakeadistinctionbetweenanaccusedwhoischargedofanoffenceunderthepenallaworapersonwhoisdeemedtohavecommittedanoffenceunderSection138oftheAct. Symmetricaltoavictimofanoffence, avictimofadeemedoffenceunderSection138oftheActalsohastherighttopreferanappealagainstanyorderpassedbythecourtacquittingtheaccusedorconvictingforalesseroffenceorimposinganinadequatecompensation. WhenviewedfromtheperspectiveofanoffenceunderanypenallaworadeemedoffenceunderSection138oftheAct, therighttofileanappealisnotcircumscribedbyanyconditionassuch, solongastheappealcanbepremisedinaccordancewithprovisotoSection372whichistherighttofileanappealbyavictim, providedthecircumstanceswhichenablesuchavictimtofileanappealaremet.
ThecomplainantunderSection138isthevictimwhomustalsohavetherighttopreferanappealunderthesaidprovision. MerelybecausetheproceedingunderSection138oftheActcommenceswiththefilingofacomplaintunderSection200oftheCrPCbyacomplainant, hedoesnotceasetobeavictiminasmuchasitisonlyavictimofadishonourofchequewhocanfileacomplaint. Thus, under Section138oftheActboththecomplainantaswellasthevictimareoneandthesameperson.”
Normally, acomplainantwhoseekstochallengeajudgementof This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/11/2025 at 11:28:04 acquittalhastomeettherigoursofSection378(4)Cr.P.C.TheaggrievedcomplainanthastoapplybeforetheHighCourtforaspecialleavetoappeal. IftheHighCourtgrantsit, thecomplainantcanpresentsuchappealbeforetheHighCourt.
However, ifthecomplainantundertheNIActisalsoheldtobea‘victim’,thenalltherightsavailabletothevictimbytheCodewouldalsobeextendedtosuchcomplainant, includingaseparaterighttoappealprovidedundertheprovisotoSection372Cr.P.C.Theprovisoreadsasfollows:-
ProvidedthatthevictimshallhavearighttopreferanappealagainstanyorderpassedbytheCourtacquittingtheaccusedorconvictingforalesseroffenceorimposinginadequatecompensation, andsuchappealshalllietotheCourttowhichanappealordinarilyliesagainsttheorderofconvictionofsuchCourt.
Acarefulreadingoftheaboveprovisowouldshowthatthevictimcanappealfromthreetypesoforders-a)anorderofacquittal,b)aconvictionforalesseroffenceorc)imposinginadequatecompensation. Italsostatesthatsuchappealshalllietothecourttowhichanappealordinarilyliesagainsttheorderofconvictionofsuchcourt. Section372isaself-containedandindependentprovisionwhichisnottobereadconjointlywithanyotherprovision, includingSection378Cr.P.C.
EffectoftheprovisoofSection372CrPCistwofold. Firstly, itprovidesthevictimanindividualrighttoappealagainstanorderofacquittalwhichisdistinctfromtherightprovidedtothecomplainantunderSection378(4)Cr.P.Casinthiscase, nospecialleavetoappealneedstobeobtainedfromtheHighCourt. Secondly, itprovidesanadditionalforumofchallengeasincaseofanappealpreferredbythevictimunderSection372CrPC,the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/11/2025 at 11:28:04 1decidedon16.07.2025inCRL.LP.367/20252decidedon22.07.2025inCRL.LP.378/20253decidedon14.07.2025inCRL.LP.360/20254decidedon15.07.2025inCRL.LP./20255decidedon21.07.2025inCriminalApplication(APPA)No.150/2023inCriminalAppealST.No.10465/2022sameliesbeforetheCourttowhichanappealordinarilyliesagainsttheorderofconvictionofsuchCourt. Section143oftheNIActstatesthatalloffencesunderChapterXVIIoftheAct, includinganoffenceunderSection138shallbetriedbyaJudicialMagistrateofFirstClassorbyaMetropolitanMagistrate. Anappealagainstconviction, andthusanappealpreferredbythevictim, wouldliebeforetheSessionsCourt.
InlightoftheSupremeCourt'srecentclarificationofthelegalposition, itisnowevidentthatthepetitioner, beingthecomplainantunderSection138ofNIAct, isalsoentitledtofileanappealagainsttheimpugnedjudgmentofacquittalbeforetheSessionsCourt, sinceheisconsideredtobeavictim. IfthisCourtweretoproceedtohearanddecidetheappealatthisstage, itcoulddeprivethepartiesofanavailableforumi.e.,this Court, forfurtherchallenge.
Co-ordinateBenchesofthisCourtinYogeshKatariav. State(GovtofNCTofDelhi)&Anr1,AbdulMalikvState(GovtofNCTofDelhi)&Anr2,PromilaLekhiv. SafeHandsChitsPvt. Ltd.&Anr3,ShriUjjawalArorav. StateandOrs4,takingnoteofthedecisioninCelestiumFinancial(Supra),haveallowedthewithdrawalofleavepetitionsfiledbeforethisCourtwithlibertytothepetitioners/complainantstoapproachtheconcernedSessionsCourt.
Similarly, the HighCourtofBombayinGunjanw/oAlokKhandelwalv. ParvaizHussain5,DnyaneshwarDinkarBadvev. TheState This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/11/2025 at 11:28:04 6decidedon24.07.2025inCriminalWritPetitionNo.793/20257decidedon31.07.2025inCRL.ANo.200021of20188decidedon23.07.2025inCRL.ANo.146OF20159decidedon07.08.2025inCRMPNo.579of202110decidedon16.07.2025inACQANo.340of201811decidedon21.07.2025inCRL.A.No.11872of202212decidedon17.06.2025inR/CR.MA/3473/202513decidedon04.08.2025inCrl.L.P./34/202514decidedon28.07.2025inAPPLICATIONU/S378No.-56of202515decidedon21.07.2025inCr.MP(M)No.1629of2025ofMaharashtra&Anr6,the HighCourtofKarnatakainSidagondappavsShafiAhammad7,SriTHLenkappavsSriSanjay8,HighCourtofChattisgarhinNemnathYogivs. YashwantChandravanshi9,NeelamSahuv. NaradNagwanshi10,and Smt. KirtiKurianv. AjaySingh; the HighCourtofMadhyaPradeshinUrmilaMadrahv. SamarpanJain11andtheHighCourtofGujaratinBarodaCricketAssociationv. StateofGujarat&Anr12,GauhatiHighCourtinBhargabKaushikv. DilipKumarBhagabati13,AllahabadHighCourtinIndianFarmForestryDevelopmentCooperativeLtdv. MangalaTradingCompany14andHimachalPradeshHighCourtinRoshanChauhanvs. MohanLal15havealsoreliedonCelestiumFinancial(Supra)torelegatethepartiestocontesttheircasebeforetheSessionsCourt.
TheofficenoteshowsthattheCourtnoticehasbeenserveduponthepetitioner/counsel, however, despiteservice, noneappearsforthepetitioner.
Consideringtheabove, thepresentpetitionisdismissedwiththedirectionsthattheaccompanyingappealbetransferredtotheconcernedAppellateCourtofSessionsandbeconsideredasanappealundertheprovisotoSection413ofBNSS(formerlySection372ofCrPC)andnumberedaccordingly.
TheRegistryisdirectedtotransferentirerecordofthecaseincluding This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/11/2025 at 11:28:04 therequisitionedcopiesofTCR,totheconcernedPrincipalDistrict&SessionsJudge, whomayassignittotheconcernedAppellateCourt/learnedASJhavingthejurisdictionandforwhichpurpose, itwouldbelistedbeforetheconcernedPrincipalDistrict&SessionsJudge, atthefirstinstance, on06.12.2025fordirections.
IncasethereareapplicationspendingforCondonationofDelay, thesamebealsotransferredtobeconsideredbythelearnedASJinaccordancewithlaw.
Consideringthatthematterhasbeenpendingforconsiderabletime, learnedAppellateCourtisrequestedtomakeanendeavourtodisposethematterasexpeditiouslyaspossible.
Theearlierdatefixed, ifany, beforethisCourtstandscancelled.
ItismadeclearthatthisCourthasnotmadeanyobservationsastothemeritsofthecaseandallrightsandcontentionsofthepartiesareleftopentobeagitatedbeforetheCourtconcerned.
AcopyoftheorderbesenttotheconcernedPrincipalDistrictandSessionsJudgefornecessaryinformationandcompliance.MANOJKUMAROHRI,JOCTOBER16,2025ga
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.