Gujarat HC: NI Act Complainants Can Challenge Acquittals

The Gujarat High Court has solidified the rights of cheque bounce complainants, ruling that they qualify as 'victims' and possess an unconditional right to challenge acquittal orders before Sessions Courts. This landmark clarification ensures that private complainants under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 do not need to seek special leave from the High Court to appeal an acquittal, placing their rights on par with those of the accused.

Justice Hemant M. Prachchhak presided over the matter where a financial transport company challenged a trial court's decision to acquit an accused in a cheque dishonour case. The proceedings highlighted the evolving landscape of criminal appeals under the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and the new Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, specifically regarding the hierarchy of courts for such grievances.

Victim Status of Section 138 Complainants

The High Court relied heavily on the authoritative pronouncement by the Supreme Court in Celestium Financial Vs. A.Gnanasekaran Etc.. The Court underscored that a person who suffers the impact of a dishonoured cheque is effectively a victim of the crime, regardless of the proceeding being initiated via a private complaint under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "In the case of an offence alleged against an accused under Section 138 of the Act, we are of the view that the complainant is indeed the victim owing to the alleged dishonour of a cheque. In the circumstances, the complainant can proceed as per the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC and he may exercise such an option and he need not then elect to proceed under Section 378 of the CrPC... Merely because the proceeding under Section 138 of the Act commences with the filing of a complaint under Section 200 of the CrPC by a complainant, he does not cease to be a victim inasmuch as it is only a victim of a dishonour of cheque who can file a complaint. Thus, under Section 138 of the Act both the complainant as well as the victim are one and the same person."

The Court further referred to previous holdings in Shivsinh Ganpatsinh Solanki Vs. State of Gujarat and Thakar Hariprasad Dalsukhram Vs. State of Gujarat and another, affirming that the right of a victim to prefer an appeal under Section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 or Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 must be absolute and uncircumscribed by conditions like seeking leave under Section 378.

High Court Directions for Transfer

While the Additional Public Prosecutor noted that the issue is currently under consideration by a larger bench of the Supreme Court, the High Court maintained that existing binding precedents must be followed for current matters.

The Court has the following directions:

"The Registry is directed to transfer the appeal to the concerned Sessions Court. After it is transferred to the concerned Sessions Court, it has to be treated as an Appeal under the proviso under Section 372 of the Code / Section 413 of BNSS and numbered accordingly and issue notice to the parties. The Registry is directed to transfer the entire record of the case, including the certified copies of the order impugned and record & proceedings, if lying with this Court, to the concerned lower Appellate Court, forthwith."

Background:

The dispute originated when the Trial Court at Jam-Khambhaliya acquitted the respondent-accused in a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The appellant, Shree Ram Transport Finance Co. Limited, initially moved the High Court under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. However, citing the recent shift in law through Celestium Financial Vs. A.Gnanasekaran Etc. and Thakar Hariprasad Dalsukhram Vs. State of Gujarat and another, the appellant sought to have the matter remanded to the Sessions Court.

The Court analyzed the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 alongside the newly enacted Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. It noted that the Parliament, by inserting the proviso to Section 372, intended to create a superior right for victims. The appeal was disposed of without entering into its merits, with a mandate for the lower appellate court to decide the matter expeditiously.

Case Details:
Case No.: R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 770 of 2021
NeutralCitation: 2026:GUJHC:46243
Case Title: Shree Ram Transport Finance Co. Limited Through Poa Jakhariya Pritesh Mukeshbhai Versus State Of Gujarat & Anr.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr Manish J Patel
For The Respondent(S): Ms Jirga Jhaveri App

Source: 2026 CaseBase(GUJ) 4134