AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 238 wordsSubhas Mehla, J
The present appeal has been filed for setting aside the judgment dated 25.04.2012 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Panchkula, whereby, respondent has been acquitted in a complaint case filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter 'NI Act').
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025(3) RCR (Criminal) 208, after considerable discussion and comparative interpretation of Sections 372 and 378(4) of Cr.P.C., concluded that the victim has a right to file an appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of Sessions. Reliance in this regard can also be placed on Satish Kumar Versus Jugal Kishor in CRM-A-2700-MA-2018 decided on 02.07.2025. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Vs. Raj Kumar Arora in 2025 INSC 498; 2025 SCC Online 819 has clarified that as a rule of thumb, judgments rendered shall be applicable retrospectively.
Therefore, in view of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in Celestium Financial (supra), the present appeal is remanded back to the learned Sessions Judge concerned with a direction to treat the same as filed under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. and to dispose of by himself/herself or entrust it to appropriate Court for its disposal.
The Registry is directed to send the complete paper-book and the record of the case to the learned Sessions Judge concerned forthwith.
Disposed of accordingly.