IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

240 CRM-A-592-2021 JARNAIL SINGH ....APPELLANT V/s SIKANDER SINGH MALUKA AND OTHER ....RESPONDENTS Date of decision: 22.01.2026 Date of Uploading:22.01.2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: None for the appellant/applicant.

*****

SUMEET GOEL , J. (Oral)

1. The substantive prayer made in the present appeal reads, thus:

“It is therefore, respectfully prayed that the present appeal may kindly be allowed and impugned judgment of acquittal dt. 03.08.2021 passed by Ld. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Phool in Criminal Complaint No.40 of 17.12.2021 titled as "Jarnail Singh Vs. Sikander Singh Maluka and others", is erroneous, illegal, wanton, against the true facts on the record and without application of judicious mind and thus is liable to be set-aside and the accused are liable to be punished as per law.”

Alongwith an appeal, an application for grant of leave has also been preferred under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C., 1973

2. I have perused the paper-book.

3. Before proceeding to consider the application (for grant of special leave to appeal)/appeal, it would be apposite to refer herein to a judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804 : 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208, relevant whereof reads as under:

“6.4 On a reading of the definition of ‘victim’, it is clear that the said expression is initially exhaustive and thereafter inclusive. The expression ‘victim’ means a person who has suffered any loss or injury. The loss or injury could be either physical, mental, a financial loss or injury. The expression injury could also be construed as a legal injury in a wider sense and not just a physical or a mental injury. The loss or injury must be caused by reason of an act or omission for which the accused person has been charged. Thus, it can be both by a positive act or negatively by an omission which is at the instance of the accused and for which such accused has been charged. Further, the expression ‘victim’ also includes his/her guardian or legal heir in the case of demise of the victim.

6.5 Thus, the expression ‘victim’ has been couched in a broad manner so as to include a person who has suffered any loss or injury. The expressions ‘loss’ or ‘injury’ themselves are of a very broad import which expressions also enlarge the scope of the expression ‘victim’. Further, the expression ‘victim’ includes not only the person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of any act or omission for which the accused person has been charged but also includes his or her guardian or legal heir which means that the definition of victim is inclusive in nature.

6.6 Having regard to the insertion of the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, we find that in the case of a victim who seeks to file an appeal, he or she could proceed under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC in the circumstances mentioned therein and need not prefer an appeal by invoking Section 378(4) of the CrPC which is in respect of appeals to be filed by a complainant. It may be that the complainant is a victim in certain cases and therefore, the victim has the right to file an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC and need not proceed under Section 378(4) of the CrPC. However, if the complainant is not a victim and intends to file an appeal, in such a case a complainant would have to proceed under Section 378 of the CrPC which circumscribes the right to file an appeal by virtue of the conditions which are stipulated under the said Section.

xxx xxx xxx xxx

7.11 A reading of section 378 would clearly indicate that in case the complainant intends to file an appeal against the order of acquittal, his right is circumscribed by certain conditions precedent. When an appeal is to be preferred by a complainant, the first question is, whether, the complainant is also the victim or only an informant. If the complainant is not a victim and the case is instituted upon a