A complainant in Section 138 NI Act cases is a victim entitled to appeal acquittal before the Sessions Court.

In brief

The question

1. Whether a complainant in a case under Section 138 of the NI Act is considered a "victim" entitled to file an appeal against acquittal before the Sessions Court under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC / Section 413 of the BNSS

The court held

The Court held that the complainant is a victim entitled to appeal to the Sessions Court.

It also directed

It disposed of the appeal by directing the Registry to transfer the entire case record and proceedings to the concerned Sessions Court.

The Sessions Court is directed to treat the matter as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC / Section 413 of the BNSS, re-number it, issue notices, and endeavor to dispose of the matter expeditiously without being influenced by the High Court's lack of commentary on the merits.

01Facts

The appellants (original complainants) filed a criminal appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) (and alternatively under Section 419 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [BNSS]) challenging the judgment and order dated 27.02.2012 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad.

p. 1

The Trial Court had acquitted the respondent-accused of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act).

p. 1

While the appeal was pending in the High Court, legal developments concerning the forum of appeal for victims in NI Act cases emerged via Supreme Court precedents.

p. 2

02Issues

i.1. Whether a complainant in a case under Section 138 of the NI Act is considered a "victim" entitled to file an appeal against acquittal before the Sessions Court under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC / Section 413 of the BNSS

p. 2 · ¶ 3-4

ii.2. Whether the present appeal, originally filed in the High Court, should be transferred to the Sessions Court for adjudication in light of recent judicial pronouncements

p. 2 · ¶ 5

03Law Applied

the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC (corresponding to Section 413 of the BNSS), which grants a victim the right to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal to the court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction

p. 2

precedent set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. (2025 (3) GLH 747), which established that a complainant under Section 138 of the NI Act is a "victim" as defined under Section 2(wa) of the CrPC

p. 3 · ¶ 7.8

Shivsinh Ganpatsinh Solanki v. State of Gujarat and Thakar Hariprasad Dalsukhram v. State of Gujarat (2026 SCC OnLine Guj 569) regarding the procedural requirement to transfer such appeals to the Sessions Court

p. 2, 5

Provisions in the judgment · 9 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 2 Section 200 Section 372 Section 374 Section 378

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 413 Section 419

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138 Section 143

04Reasoning

The Court reasoned that since the Supreme Court in Celestium Financial categorized a payee or holder of a dishonored cheque as a "victim" who has suffered the impact of the offence, such a person possesses an absolute right to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC.

pp. 3-4 · ¶ 7.8-7.12

This right is distinct from and superior to the State's right to seek leave to appeal under Section 378.

p. 4 · ¶ 7.12

Consequently, the High Court determined that the proper forum for an appeal against an acquittal by a Magistrate in a Section 138 NI Act case is the immediate superior court (the Sessions Court) rather than the High Court.

p. 2 · ¶ 4

Despite the issue being referred to a larger bench by the Supreme Court in an SLP, the Court decided to remand the matter subject to the final outcome of that reference to ensure procedural alignment with current binding precedents.

p. 3 · ¶ 6