Dayaram v. Kuldeep Kumar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-A-1339-MA-2017 (O&M) Decided on : 30.10.2025 DAYARAM . . . Applicant-appellant

Versus

KULDEEP KUMAR AND ANR . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY

Present:

Dr. (Mr.) Anand Kumar Bishnoi, Advocate for the applicant/appellant.

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

The present appeal has been preferred under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter 'Cr.P.C.') against the judgment of acquittal 06.04.2017 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pataudi, District Gurugram in a complaint filed under Section 323, 325, 506 of IPC read with Section 34 IPC.

2.

Hon'ble the Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 SCC OnLine 1320, held that an appeal is maintainable under the proviso of Section 372 Cr.P.C. (corresponding Section 413 of BNSS, 2023) against an order of acquittal passed in a complaint under Section 138 NI Act, 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.

3.

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 October 30, 2025 Vishal Vardhan Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No VISHAL VARDHAN 2025.10.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document