##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3831

1 CRA-10998-2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH

th

ON THE 5 OF FEBRUARY, 2026

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 10998 of 2022

SURENDRA SINGH

Versus

BADRILAL

Appearance:

Mr. Nilesh Dave - Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Rahul Solanki appearing on behalf of Advocate General.

ORDER

Heard on the question of maintainability.

02. This appeal under Section 415 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha

Sanhita, 2023 (earlier section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973)

is preferred by the complainant challenging the acquittal of the

respondent/accused from the charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred as "138 of the Act of 1881") in

SCNIA No.67/2021 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagda, District

Ujjain (M.P.) alongwith I.A. No.15330/2022 for grant of leave to appeal.

03. The Supreme Court in the matter of M/s. Celestium Financial vs.

A. Gnanasekaran Etc. reported in 2025 INSC 804 held 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 the

Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Supreme Court has further held

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: VARSHA SINGH

Signing time: 05-Feb-26

8:21:51 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3831

2 CRA-10998-2022

that the complainant in a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act of

1881 can also be entitled to file an appeal under proviso to section 372 of the

Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of the BNSS.

04. 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 without 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

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: VARSHA SINGH

Signing time: 05-Feb-26

8:21:51 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3831

3 CRA-10998-2022

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. having to seek special

leave under Section 378(4) of the CrPC.

7.8 In the case of an offence alleged against an accused under

Section 138 of the Act, we are of the view that the complainant is

indeed the victim owing to the alleged dishonour of a cheque. In the

circumstances, the complainant can proceed as per the proviso to

Section 372 of the CrPC and he may exercise such an option and he

need not then elect to proceed under Section 378 of the CrPC.

7.9 In this context, we wish to state that the proviso to Section

372 does not make a distinction between an accused who is charged of

an offence under the penal law or a person who is deemed to have

committed an offence under Section 138 of the Act. Symmetrical to a

victim of an offence, a victim of a deemed offence. under Section 138

of the Act also has the right to prefer an appe