High Court affirms Supreme Court’s Celestium Financial ruling that Section 138 NI Act complainants qualify as “victims” under BNSS and may file appeals against acquittals, offering persuasive authority in NI Act matters.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | ACQA/743/2024 of HARIOM FINANCE COMPANY Vs KRISHNA SINGH |
| CNR | CGHC010275332024 |
| Decision Date | 02-09-2025 |
| Judgment Author | Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal |
| Court | High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur |
| Bench | Single Judge |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms M/s Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804) |
| Type of Law | Criminal Procedure / Negotiable Instruments Act |
| Questions of Law | Whether a complainant under Section 138 NI Act qualifies as a “victim” under BNSS and can appeal under Section 413 BNSS |
| Ratio Decidendi |
|
| Judgments Relied Upon | M/s Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804) |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities |
|
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Follows | M/s Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 INSC 804) |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Supreme Court’s ruling in Celestium Financial applies to Section 138 NI Act complainants, classifying them as “victims” under the BNSS.
- Such complainants may invoke the proviso to section 372 CrPC (BNSS Section 413) to appeal acquittals.
- High Court grants 60 days’ extended period for filing the statutory appeal and will waive any limitation objections if compliance occurs within that period.
- Procedural direction to registry: return certified copies to appellant’s counsel while retaining photocopies.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The appeal under Section 419(4) BNSS challenged the acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act complaint.
- The appellant relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial, which recognized complainants under Section 138 as “victims” under BNSS.
- The Supreme Court held that “victims” can appeal under the proviso to CrPC Section 372, mirrored by BNSS Section 413.
- Applying that binding precedent, the High Court disposed of the appeal by reserving liberty to file the statutory appeal within 60 days and waiving limitation objections if timely filed.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner (Hariom Finance Company)
- Relied on the Supreme Court’s Celestium Financial ruling: a Section 138 NI Act complainant is a “victim” under BNSS and entitled to appeal under Section 413.
- Sought disposal of the appeal with liberty to file the appeal before the appropriate court, invoking the new statutory remedy.
Factual Background
- The respondent was acquitted on 27.08.2021 by the JMFC, Durg, in Complaint Case No. 518/2013 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
- The appellant filed an acquittal appeal under Section 419(4) of the BNSS, challenging that order.
- Appellant’s counsel submitted that under Celestium Financial, the complainant is a “victim” with a statutory right of appeal.
- The High Court reserved liberty for the appellant to file the appeal under BNSS Section 413 within an extended 60-day period.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: offence on dishonour of cheque.
- Section 2(wa) CrPC / Section 2(y) BNSS: defines “victim” to include a complainant under Section 138 NI Act.
- Proviso to CrPC Section 372 / BNSS Section 413: allows a “victim” to file an appeal against acquittal.
Procedural Innovations
- The High Court directed that if the statutory appeal is filed within 60 days of this order, it will waive any objection as to limitation.
- Registry to return certified copies of the impugned order to the appellant’s counsel while retaining photocopies for the record.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Supreme Court’s Celestium Financial decision affirmed.
Citations
- 2025:CGHC:44779
- 2025 INSC 804 (M/s Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran)