M/s Celestium Financial v. A Gnanasekaran, 2025
The Right of a victim to appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC without seeking special leave.
Judgement Details
Court
Supreme Court of India
Date of Decision
7 June 2025
Judges
Justice B.V. Nagarathna ⦁ Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Facts of the Case
-
The complainant, M/s Celestium Financial, had filed a case under Section 138 of the NI Act due to the dishonour of a cheque.
-
The accused was acquitted by the trial court.
-
The complainant sought to appeal the acquittal.
-
The legal question arose as to whether the complainant, being a “victim”, could file an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC without seeking special leave under Section 378(4) CrPC.
Issues
-
Whether a complainant in a Section 138 NI Act case qualifies as a “victim” under Section 2(wa) CrPC?
-
Whether such a victim has an unconditional right to file an appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC?
-
Whether the victim/complainant is required to seek leave to appeal under Section 378(4) CrPC?
Judgement
-
The Supreme Court held that a complainant under Section 138 NI Act qualifies as a “victim” under Section 2(wa) CrPC.
-
Therefore, such a victim can file an appeal against the acquittal of the accused under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC, even if they were not the one who filed the original complaint.
-
The court clarified that there is no requirement for the victim to obtain special leave under Section 378(4) CrPC.
Held
-
The Court conclusively held that the proviso to Section 372 CrPC grants a direct, unconditional right to the victim to file an appeal against acquittal, regardless of whether they are the complainant.
-
This right is independent and superior to the general appeal process under Section 378.
Analysis
-
The definition of “victim” under Section 2(wa) CrPC is interpreted broadly, encompassing anyone who has suffered harm or injury due to the crime, including cheque dishonour cases.
-
The proviso to Section 372 CrPC, inserted in 2009, was intended to empower victims and remove procedural hurdles in accessing justice.
-
Unlike Section 378(4) which requires leave of the court for appeals against acquittals by complainants, the proviso creates a separate pathway for victims, free from such conditions.
-
The Parliament deliberately chose not to amend Section 378 to cover victims under the same umbrella as complainants, thereby indicating a legislative intent to provide greater rights to victims.
-
In cases under Section 138 NI Act, which are private complaints, the State’s involvement is minimal. Hence, the victim-complainant is central to seeking redress and must be given direct appellate rights.
-
The Court aligned the victim’s right to appeal with the accused’s right to appeal under Section 374 CrPC, establishing equality in appellate rights.