Palbachan Singh v. Harpreet Singh

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 03.11.2025 Palbachan Singh . . . Appellant

Versus

Harpreet Singh . . . Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY PRESENT: Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Naveen Jhajholia, Advocate for the appellant.

**** AMAN CHAUDHARY , J. (Oral) 1.

The present application has been preferred under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter 'Cr.P.C.') seeking grant of leave to appeal against the order dated 20.07.2018 passed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, SAS Nagar, Mohali, vide which the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 420 IPC, was ordered to be dismissed in default for want of prosecution.

2.

As it emerges from the factual matrix, the accused-respondent No.2 had issued three cheques amounting to a total of Rs.35,00,000/- in favour of the complainant-applicant, to discharge his legal debt, which on presentation got dishonoured, due to 'funds insufficient'. A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed, wherein summoning order was passed, but due to absence of the complainantapplicant as well as its counsel, the said complaint came to be dismissed in default for want of prosecution vide order dated 20.07.2018. 3.

Learned counsel submits that the accused was summoned to face the trial; the complainant was regularly appearing before the trial Court,

- 2 - but on 20.07.2018, following which the complaint came to be dismissed in default for want of prosecution. The absence was neither wilful nor deliberate. The applicant did not have anything to gain by not appearing or delaying the proceedings, which as a matter of fact, had already been pending since 2013.

4.

It would be apposite to make a reference to Section 256 Cr.P.C., which reads thus:

 

  

     

   



        

 





                     

      

           

   

 

    

         



   !"      

 

      

 

                     

            

   

  

  

# $% "  

&

  

  

   & 

   

    #'

 (# )   "   

 " 

 

  "





 

# #  &

  

# )     

         

   



  

    

        

       "   #* "

   



  

 



  " 

    

# +#          

  

 $,+  -  .//  $0-

- 3 - *1  .



/       

    

     



        

      "   .

-23-/!/    .

-340/!/    
)   

   

 

        

 

      

    

   

 



  & 

        

 

$(+ / / !   23-#' 3# *1  .



/    !"  #    $

  %  $,$(  .//  56  -$,            

       "     .

  -3$  /#!#/#  



.

0-78.. 2023) against an order of acquittal passed in a complaint, by treating the complainant therein, as a 'victim' within the meaning under Section 2 (wa) of Cr.P.C, in view of which, the present appeal is disposed of by directing the concerned Sessions Judge, for treating it to have been filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. and assigning the same to the Court concerned for deciding it.

8.

Registry is directed to send the complete paper-book and trial Court record, if received, along with the said order forthwith, while also informing the parties.

(AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE November 03, 2025 Vishal Vardhan Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No