TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellant Allowed to Withdraw Appeal and File Fresh One Within 60 Days Despite Limitation Bar</h1> <h3>Kamlesh Singh Rajput Versus Ramjas Kaushik</h3> The Chhattisgarh HC allowed the appellant to withdraw the appeal and granted liberty to file a fresh appeal against the impugned judgment dated 10.05.2018 ... Dishonour of Cheque - entitlement of complainant in a complaint u/s 138 of NI Act 1881 to file an appeal under proviso to section 372 Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 413 of the BNSS - victim as defined in Section 2(wa) of Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 2(y) of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - HELD THAT:- This Court is inclined to permit the appellant to withdraw this appeal by granting him liberty to prefer the appeal against the impugned judgment dated 10.05.2018 before the concerned Sessions Judge within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is clarified that if such an appeal is filed before the concerned Session Judge within the time prescribed by this Court, it would not insist upon the limitation while deciding the same and will proceed to decide the same in accordance with law. In that view of the matter, Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned judgment after obtaining the attested photocopy of the same - record of the case be sent back to the concerned J.M.F.C. forthwith - Appeal disposed off. ISSUES: Whether a complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 qualifies as a 'victim' within the meaning of Section 2(wa) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.).Whether such a complainant/victim has the right to file an appeal against an order of acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. without seeking special leave under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C.The scope and applicability of Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. regarding leave to appeal by a complainant in cases instituted upon a complaint.The legal effect and interpretation of the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. in relation to appeals filed by victims of offences, including deemed offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.Whether limitation periods should be strictly enforced in appeals filed by victims under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. RULINGS / HOLDINGS: The complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 'also qualifies as a victim within the meaning of Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C.' because the complainant has suffered economic loss due to dishonour of the cheque, which is deemed an offence under that provision.Such a complainant/victim 'ought to be extended the benefit of the proviso to Section 372,' enabling him to maintain an appeal against an order of acquittal 'in his own right without having to seek special leave under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C.'Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. requires a complainant who is not a victim to seek special leave to appeal against an order of acquittal; however, if the complainant is also a victim, he can appeal under the proviso to Section 372 without this requirement.The proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C. confers an 'absolute right' to victims of offences, including deemed offences under Section 138 of the Act, to prefer an appeal 'without mandating any condition precedent,' distinguishing this right from that of a complainant or the State.The limitation period shall not be insisted upon when a victim files an appeal under the proviso to Section 372, as the right to appeal is superior and unconditional. RATIONALE: The Court relied on the statutory definitions and the Supreme Court's interpretation that a complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is the aggrieved party suffering economic harm, thus qualifying as a victim under Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C.The proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., inserted effective 31.12.2009, was intended by Parliament to grant victims an unqualified right to appeal, paralleling the accused's right to appeal under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C., thereby enhancing victims' procedural rights.Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. governs appeals by complainants in cases instituted on complaint but imposes conditions only when the complainant is not a victim; thus, victims are exempt from seeking special leave to appeal.The Court emphasized the absence of State involvement in proceedings under Section 138, highlighting the private nature of the complaint and reinforcing the complainant's status as victim entitled to appeal rights under the proviso to Section 372.The Court recognized the legislative intent to place victims' rights on a footing equal to accused persons, ensuring victims can appeal acquittals or inadequate compensation without procedural hurdles such as leave to appeal or limitation constraints.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
