Cheque dishonour complainant is not a "victim" for Section 372 appeal rights under criminal procedure law.

A complainant in a cheque dishonour prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act is confined to the statutory role of payee or holder in due course under Section 142, and that status is not interchangeable with the definition of "victim" under Section 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The broader appellate right under the proviso to Section 372 is therefore not available merely because the complainant suffered the offence's consequences. The applicable remedy is the appeal route specifically recognised for the complainant, and an appeal under Section 372 is not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether a complainant in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is a victim within the meaning of Section 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and can therefore maintain an appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of that Code.

Analysis: A complaint under Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is confined to the payee or holder in due course of the cheque. The statutory status of a complainant under that provision is not interchangeable with the definition of "victim" under Section 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The remedy against acquittal in such matters is the appellate route specifically recognised for the complainant, and the broader right under the proviso to Section 372 is not attracted merely because the complainant has suffered the consequences of the offence.

Conclusion: The complainant is not a victim for the purpose of the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and an appeal under that provision is not maintainable.

---