A.V. Precision Tubes Private Limited through its Director Shri Amit Garg A.V. Precision Tubes v. M.G. Enterprises through its proprietor M.G. Enterprises through its proprietor
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH 236 CRA-AS- -499-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: 11.09.2025 Date of decision: A.V. Precision Tubes Private Limited through its Director Shri Amit Garg A.V. Precision Tubes Private Limited through its A.V. Precision Tubes Private Limited through its ...Applicant VERSUS M.G. Enterprises through its proprietor M.G. Enterprises through its proprietor ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
Legal Reasoning
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. for the applicant. . Shadab Ahmad, Advocate, for the applicant. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) VINOD S. BHARDWAJ The present appeal has been preferred under The present been preferred under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘Cr the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘Cr.P.C.’) against the passed by the learned Judicial judgment of acquittal dated 02.08.2022 passed by the learned Judicial judgment of acquittal dated Magistrate 1st Class, Hisar in a case stemming from Magistrate 1st Class in a case stemming from complaint dated 12.10.2016 filed under Section egotiable Instruments Act, 1881 filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. The complaint (supra) was filed on th The complaint (supra) was filed o n the ground of dishonour of four cheques amounting amounting Rs.1,50,000/-, Rs.1,26,963/ , Rs.1,26,963/-, Rs.1,50,000/- and After assessing all the material available on the record, the Rs.1,50,000/-. After assessing all the material available on the record, the After assessing all the material available on the record, the learned trial Court acquitted the respondent(s) vide judgment dated learned trial Court acquitted the respondent(s) vide judgment dated learned trial Court acquitted the respondent(s) vide judgment dated 02.08.2022. 3. M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208, after considerable Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208 Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208 discussion and comparative interpretation of Sections 372 and 378(4) of discussion and comparative interpretation of Sections 372 and 378(4) of discussion and comparative interpretation of Sections 372 and 378(4) of Cr.P.C., concluded that the victim has a right to file an appeal under Section Cr.P.C., concluded that the victim has a right to file a Cr.P.C., concluded that the victim has a right to file a SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.09.12 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 236 CRA-AS-499 499-2023(O&M) 2 372 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions. Speaking through Justice B.V. 372 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions. Speaking through Justice B.V. 372 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions. Speaking through Justice B.V. Nagarathna, the following was held: Nagarathna, the following was held: 7.12 “7.12 The reasons for the above distinction are not far to The reasons for the above distinction are not far to see and can be elaborated as follows: see and can be elaborated as follows: see and can be elaborated as follows: crime must have an absolute right to Firstly, the victim of a crime must have an absolute right to Firstly prefer an appeal which cannot be circumscribed by any prefer an appeal which cannot be circumscribed by any prefer an appeal which cannot be circumscribed by any condition precedent. In the instant case, a victim under Section condition precedent. In the instant case, a victim under Section condition precedent. In the instant case, a victim under Section 138 of the Act, i.e., a payee or the holder of a cheque is a 138 of the Act, i.e., a payee or the holder of a cheque is a 138 of the Act, i.e., a payee or the holder of a cheque is a person who has suffered the impact of the offence committed by person who has suffered the impact of person who has suffered the impact of a person who is charged of the offence, namely, the accused, a person who is charged of the offence, namely, a person who is charged of the offence, namely, whose cheque has been dishonoured. whose cheque has been dishonoured. whose cheque has been dishonoured. , the right of a victim of a crime must be placed on par Secondly, the right of a victim of a crime must be placed on par Secondly with the right of an accused who has suffered a conviction, with the right of an accused who has suffered a conviction, with the right of an accused who has suffered a conviction, matter of right can prefer an appeal under Section who, as a matter of right can prefer an appeal under Section who, as a C. A person convicted of a crime has the right 374 of the Cr.P.C. A person convicted of a crime has the right 374 of the Cr to prefer an appeal under Section 374 as a matter of right and to prefer an appeal under Section 374 as a matter of right and to prefer an appeal under Section 374 as a matter of right and not being subjected to any conditions. Similarly, a victim of a not being subjected to any conditions. Similarly, a victim of a not being subjected to any conditions. Similarly, a victim of a be the nature of the crime, unconditionally crime, whatever be the nature of the crime, unconditionally crime, whatever must have a right to prefer an appeal. must have a right to prefer an appeal. must have a right to prefer an appeal. , it is for this reason that the Parliament thought it fit to Thirdly, it is for this reason that the Parliament thought it fit to Thirdly section 372 without mandating any insert the proviso to sub-section 372 without mandating any insert the proviso to sub condition precedent to be fulfilled by the victim of an offence, condition precedent to be fulfilled by the condition precedent to be fulfilled by the which expression also includes the legal representatives of a which expression also includes the legal representatives of a which expression also includes the legal representatives of a deceased victim who can prefer an appeal. deceased victim who can prefer an appeal. deceased victim who can prefer an appeal. On the contrary, as against an order of acquittal, the State, On the contrary, as against an order of acquittal, the State, On the contrary, as against an order of acquittal, the State, SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.09.12 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 236 CRA-AS-499 499-2023(O&M) 3 through the Public Prosecutor can prefer an appeal even if the through the Public Prosecutor can prefer an appeal even if the through the Public Prosecutor can prefer an appeal even if the ainant does not prefer such an appeal, though of course complainant does not prefer such an appeal, though of course compl such an appeal is with the leave of the court. However, it is not such an appeal is with the leave of the court. However, it is not such an appeal is with the leave of the court. However, it is not always necessary for the State or a complainant to prefer an always necessary for the State or a complainant to prefer an always necessary for the State or a complainant to prefer an appeal. But when it comes to a victim’s right to prefer an appeal. But when it comes to a victim’s right to prefer an appeal. But when it comes to a victim’s right to prefer an sistence on seeking special leave to appeal from appeal, the insistence on seeking special leave to appeal from appeal, the in the High Court under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. would be the High Court under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. would be the High Court under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. would be contrary to what has been intended by the Parliament by contrary to what has been intended by the Parliament by contrary to what has been intended by the Parliament by insertion of the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. insertion of the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. insertion of the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. Fourthly, the Parliament has not ame Fourthly , the Parliament has not amended Section 378 to circumscribe the victim’s right to prefer an appeal just as it has circumscribe the victim’s right to prefer an appeal just as it has circumscribe the victim’s right to prefer an appeal just as it has with regard to a complainant or the State filing an appeal. On with regard to a complainant or the State filing an appeal. On with regard to a complainant or the State filing an appeal. On the other hand, the Parliament has inserted the proviso to the other hand, the Parliament has inserted the proviso to the other hand, the Parliament has inserted the proviso to Section 372 so as to envisage a superior right for the victim of Section 372 so as to envisage a superior right Section 372 so as to envisage a superior right an offence to prefer an appeal on the grounds mentioned an offence to prefer an appeal on the grounds mentioned an offence to prefer an appeal on the grounds mentioned therein as compared to a complainant. therein as compared to a complainant. therein as compared to a complainant. , the involvement of the State in respect of an offence Fifthly, the involvement of the State in respect of an offence Fifthly under Section 138 of the Act is conspicuous by its absence. This under Section 138 of the Act is conspicuous by its absence. This under Section 138 of the Act is conspicuous by its absence. This omplaint filed under that provision is in the is because the complaint filed under that provision is in the is because the c nature of a private complaint as per Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. nature of a private complaint as per Section nature of a private complaint as per Section and Section 143 of the Act by an express intention incorporates and Section 143 of the Act by an express intention incorporates and Section 143 of the Act by an express intention incorporates the provisions of the Cr.P.C. in the matter of trial of such a the provisions of the Cr.P.C. in the matter of trial of such a the provisions of the Cr.P.C. in the matter of trial of such a d as a criminal offence. Therefore, the deemed offence tried as a criminal offence. Therefore, the deemed offence trie complainant, who is the victim of a dishonour of cheque must complainant, who is the victim of a dishonour of cheque must complainant, who is the victim of a dishonour of cheque must be construed to be victim in terms of the proviso to Section 372 be construed to be victim in terms of the proviso to Section 372 be construed to be victim in terms of the proviso to Section 372 SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.09.12 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 236 CRA-AS-499 499-2023(O&M) 4 read with the definition of victim under Section 2(wa) of the read with the definition of victim under Section 2(wa) of the read with the definition of victim under Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C.” Cr.P.C.” 4. of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court Therefore, in view in Celestium Financial (supra) Celestium Financial (supra), the present , the present appeal is remanded to the learned Sessions Judge, Hisar with a direction to treat the same as an appeal learned Sessions Judge with a direction to treat the same as an appeals filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and entrust the same to appropriate filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and entrust the same to a filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and entrust the same to a Court for its disposal on merits. Court for its disposal on merits. 5. The Registry is directed to send the complete paper-book and The Registry is directed to send the complete paper The Registry is directed to send the complete paper the record of the case to the learned Sessions Judge, Hisar forthwith. the record of the case to the learned Sessions Judge the record of the case to the learned Sessions Judge 6.
Decision
Disposed of accordingly. Pending miscellaneous applications, if Disposed of accordingly. Pending miscellaneous applications, if Disposed of accordingly. Pending miscellaneous applications, if disposed of. any, also stand disposed of. 11.09.2025 Sumit Gusain (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable Whether reportable Yes/No Yes/No SUMIT SINGH GUSAIN 2025.09.12 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document