Victims have the unconditional right to appeal against acquittal in criminal cases, aligning with legislative intent to ensure justice is accessible and prompt.

JUDGMENT :

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. 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 of acquittal dated 07.09.2018 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa in a case stemming from complaint dated 25.08.2017 filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter ‘NI Act’).

2. Tersely put, the facts of the case are that the respondent had borrowed Rs.4,00,000/- from the applicant on 16.07.2015 at an interest of 24% p.a. The transaction was done via RTGS on 16.07.2015. It was also agreed that the rate of interest will decrease from 24% to 18% p.a. w.e.f. 01.04.2016. In order to discharge his liability, the respondent issued a cheque bearing No.029160 dated 12.07.2017 for the amount of Rs.5,80,000/-, drawn on ICICI Bank, Mansa. However, on presentation for encashment, the same was dishonoured vide memo dated 17.07.2017 with the remarks- funds insufficient and account dormant. Consequently, the applicant- appellant served a legal notice dated 20.07.2017 on the respondent. Since the respondent failed to make the requisite payment in the stipulated time, complaint (supra) was filed against him. After assessing all the material available on the record, the learned trial Court acquitted the respondent vide judgment dated 07.09.2018.

- IMPACT OF THE DECISION IN CELESTIUM FINANCIAL CASE

3. There has been an ongoing debate whether the right of the victim to file an appeal against acquittal in a complaint case would fall under Section 372 or Section 378 (4) of Cr.P.C. The same was recently put to rest by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. , 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208.

4. Till recently, there was a variation in the opinion expressed by various High Courts regarding the maintainability of an appeal against acquittal by the jurisdictional Magistrate. Some High Courts inclined towards the idea that, in a private complaint, an appeal against acquittal can be filed by the victim in view of the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C., inserted vide Act 5 of 2009, applicable w.e.f. 31.12.2009. Conversely, some others concluded that in such a scenario, an appeal could be filed by the complainant only in the High Court under Section 378 (4) of Cr.P.C. This divergence of the views on the issue of maintainability of an appeal against acquittal by the victim led to constitution of a Full Bench of this Court and the matter was taken up in the case of M/s. Tata Steel Limited vs. M/s. Atma Tube Products Limited 2013(2) R.C.R.(Criminal) 1005.

5. Prior to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial (supra), naturally, this Court was bound by the judgment rendered by the Full Bench of this Court in Tata Steel (supra) wherein it was concluded that a victim in a private complaint case can challenge the judgment of acquittal by filing an appeal only before the High Court, after seeking special leave to appeal under Section 378 (4) of Cr.P.C. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial (supra), after considerable 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 372 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions. Speaking through Justice B.V. Nagarathna, the following was held:

“7.12 The reasons for the above distinction are not far to see and can be elaborated as follows:

Firstly,