M/S Maghar Singh Timbers Pvt. Ltd. v. Right Brothers And Another

CRA-AS-310-2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRA-AS-310-2023 Date of Decision: 25.09.2025 M/S MAGHAR SINGH TIMBERS PVT. LTD.

......Appellant Verus RIGHT BROTHERS AND ANOTHER ......Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. S.S. Behl, Advocate for the appellant.

*** ANOOP CHITKARA J.

Criminal Complaint No. 993 of 24.04.2013 under SecƟon 138 of the NegoƟable Instruments Act, Ɵtled as "M/s Maghar Singh Timbers Pvt. Ltd Vs. Right Brothers and another" decided on 13.10.2015 CIS No. COMA/49311/2013 1.

Feeling aggrieved by the trial court's judgment, dismissing the complaint on merits, and acquiƫng the accused/respondent, the complainant had come up before this Court by filing the above-menƟoned appeal.

2.

Vide order dated 17.05.2023, the appeal was admiƩed. 3.

Counsel for the appellant prays for transfer of appeal to the first Appellate Court in view of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in "CelesƟum Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208, decided on 08.04.2025". 4.

In CelesƟum Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208, decided on 08.04.2025, Hon'ble Supreme Court holds, [7.8] In the case of an offence alleged against an accused under SecƟon 138 of the Act, we are of the view that the complainant is indeed the vicƟm owing to the alleged dishonour of a cheque. In the circumstances, the complainant can proceed as per the proviso to SecƟon 372 of the CrPC and he may exercise such an opƟon and he need not then elect to proceed under SecƟon 378 of the CrPC. [8]. The right to prefer an appeal is no doubt a statutory right and the right to prefer an appeal by an accused against a convicƟon is not merely a statutory right but can also be construed to be a fundamental right under ArƟcles 14 and 21 of the ConsƟtuƟon. If that is so, then the right of a vicƟm of an offence to prefer an appeal cannot be equated with the right of the State or the complainant to JYOTI 2025.09.29 09:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

CRA-AS-310-2023 prefer an appeal. Hence, the statutory rigours for filing of an appeal by the State or by a complainant against an order of acquiƩal cannot be read into the proviso to SecƟon 372 of the CrPC so as to restrict the right of a vicƟm to file an appeal on the grounds menƟoned therein, when none exists.

[10]. As already noted, the proviso to SecƟon 372 of the CrPC was inserted in the statute book only with effect from 31.12.2009. The object and reason for such inserƟon must be realised and must be given its full effect to by a court. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the vicƟm of an offence has the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to SecƟon 372 of the CrPC, irrespecƟve of whether he is a complainant or not. Even if the vicƟm of an offence is a complainant, he can sƟll proceed under the proviso to SecƟon 372 and need not advert to sub-secƟon (4) of SecƟon 378 of the CrPC. 5.

In BNSS, 2023, S. 413 is analogous to S. 372 CrPC, 1973, and thus the raƟo of CelesƟum Financial shall apply.

6.

However, the complainant should not face the burden of filing an appeal again before the Sessions Court because the law has been interpreted recently. Therefore, in the interest of Equity, JusƟce, and Fair play, it would be appropriate to refer this maƩer to the Sessions Court, where it will be registered as an Appeal under the Proviso to S. 372 CrPC/413 BNSS, 2023, as applicable. If there is any objecƟon regarding whether it is an appeal under the CrPC or BNSS, it shall be registered under the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS, 2023, because the CrPC, 1973, has been repealed.

7.

Given above, the Registry is to send this file along with the Lower Court's Record, if any, to the concerned Sessions Division.

Appeal is disposed of in the terms menƟoned above. All pending applicaƟon(s), if any, stand closed.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 25.09.2025 JyoƟ-II Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No.

JYOTI 2025.09.29 09:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.