TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a complainant in a cheque dishonour 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 appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code without seeking special leave under Section 378(4) of the Code.
Analysis: The proviso to Section 372 of the Code confers an independent right on a victim to prefer an appeal against acquittal, conviction for a lesser offence, or inadequate compensation. The definition of victim in Section 2(wa) is broad and includes a person who has suffered loss or injury caused by the act or omission for which the accused has been charged. In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the payee or holder of the dishonoured cheque suffers economic loss from the dishonour and is therefore a victim. A complaint under Section 138 is a private complaint, but that does not exclude the complainant from also being the victim. The statutory requirement of special leave under Section 378(4) applies to a complainant proceeding as such and does not curtail the separate appellate right of a victim under the proviso to Section 372.
Conclusion: The complainant in a Section 138 prosecution is a victim and may appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code without obtaining special leave under Section 378(4).
TaxTMI 
