Digitally signed ASHISH by ASHISH TIWARI TIWARI Date:

2025.08.23

14:11:42 +0530

2025:CGHC:33403 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Cr.M.P. No. 878 of 2025

1. Rajkumar Kashyap S/o Late Shri Shambhu Prasad Kashyap Aged About 60 Years R/o Old Bus Stand, Telephone Exchange Road, Police Station Tarbahar, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

2 - Smt. Anita Kashyap W/o Shri Rajkumar Kashyap Aged About 52 Years R/o Old Bus Stand, Telephone Exchange Road, Police Station Tarbahar, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioners versus

1 - Smt. Lalmuni Rai W/o Shri Pashupatinath Rai Aged About 50 Years R/o Quarter No. 223 L, Wireless Colony, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Umavati Devi W/o Shri Vimlesh Kumar Rai Aged About 41 Years R/o Dipka Katghora Road, Katghora, Tahsil- Katghora, Police Station- Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.) 3 - Upendra Sharma S/o Late Shri Shivnandan Sharma Aged About 48 Years R/o Sundar Nagar, Pali Road, Dipka, Tahsil And Police Station- Katghora, District Korba (C.G.) (Absconding). 4 - Ajay Kapse S/o Shri R. Kapse Aged About 43 Years R/o Rajkishore Nagar, Bilaspur, Police Station- Sarkanda, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur (C.G).

... Respondents For Applicants : Shri Ayush Lal, Advocate appeared on behalf of Shri Surfaraj Khan, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment on Board

20/08/2025

1. This is an application under Section 419 (4) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNSS”). An application for grant of leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment of acquittal dated 30.12.2024 passed in Criminal Complaint Case No. 52/2018 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bilaspur, District – Bialspur(C.G.).

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that though leave to appeal has not been granted, recently the Supreme Court has delivered a judgment in the matter of M/s. Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. reported in 2025 INSC 804 holding that the complainant in a complaint filed under section 138 of the Act of 1881 is also a victim as defined in section 2(wa) of Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 2(y) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short the “BNSS”). He submits that the Supreme Court has further held that the complainant in a complaint under section 138 of the Act of 1881 can also be entitled to file an appeal under proviso to section 372 Cr.P.C.

corresponding to Section 413 of the BNSS.

3. Relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced as under:-

7. xxx xxx xxx 7.1 xxx xxx xxx 7.2 xxx xxx xxx 7.3 xxx xxx xxx 7.4 xxx xxx xxx 7.5 xxx xxx xxx 7.6 xxx xxx xxx

7.7 In the context of offences under the Act, particularly under Section 138 of the said Act, the complainant is clearly the aggrieved party who has suffered economic loss and injury due to the default in payment by the accused owing to the dishonour of the cheque which is deemed to be an offence under that provision. In such circumstances, it would be just, reasonable and in consonance with the spirit of the CrPC to hold that the complainant under the Act also qualifies as a victim within the meaning of Section 2(wa) of the CrPC. Consequently, such a complainant ought to be extended the benefit of the proviso to Section 372, thereby enabling him to maintain an appeal against an order of acquittal in his own right withouthe cheque which is deemed to be an offence under that provision. In such circumstances, it would be just, reasonable and in consonance with the spirit of the CrPC to hold that the complainant under the Act also qualifies as a victim within the meaning of Section 2(wa) of the CrPC. Consequently, such a complainant ought to be extended the benefit of the proviso to Section 372, thereby enabling him to maintain an appeal against an order of acquittal in his own right without having to seek special leave under Section 378(4) of the CrPC.t having to seek special leave under Section 378(4) of the CrPC.