Supreme Court Rules Victim Can Appeal Acquittal Without Being Complainant

3 hours ago 5
ARTICLE AD BOX

Last Updated:July 07, 2025, 17:06 IST

Court stressed that the term “victim” must be interpreted broadly to include financial and legal injuries, reaffirming the principle in Mallikarjun Kodagali.

 PTI

Supreme Court of India | File Image: PTI

The Supreme Court has ruled that a victim has the statutory right to appeal an acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), even if they are not the original complainant in the case.

A bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma clarified that a victim, including a complainant in cheque bounce cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is not required to seek permission under Section 378(4) of the CrPC to file an appeal.

“If the complainant is not the victim and wishes to appeal, they would need to proceed under Section 378, which imposes certain preconditions. But where the complainant is the victim, they can appeal directly under the proviso to Section 372," the court explained.

The ruling came in an appeal filed by M/s Celestium Financial, challenging a Madras High Court order dated June 12, 2024, that had dismissed their plea for leave to appeal an acquittal in a cheque dishonour case.

The question before the Court was whether an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC would be maintainable against an order of acquittal passed in a private complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act, by recognising the complainant as a “victim" under Section 2(wa) of the CrPC.

The bench answered in the affirmative, observing that in cheque bounce cases, the complainant is indeed the aggrieved party due to the dishonour of the instrument. “In such circumstances, the complainant qualifies as a victim and can invoke the proviso to Section 372 to appeal without the procedural rigours of Section 378," the Court said.

The Court further clarified that although proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act begin with the filing of a complaint under Section 200 CrPC, the complainant does not cease to be a victim. “It is only a victim of a dishonoured cheque who can file a complaint under Section 138. Therefore, under the NI Act, the complainant and the victim are the same person," it noted.

Delving into the legislative intent of Section 2(wa) of the CrPC, the Court stated that the term “victim" includes anyone who has suffered a loss, physical, mental, financial, or legal, due to an act or omission for which the accused has been charged.

“This includes both active misconduct and passive omission. It also extends to a victim’s guardian or legal heir in the event of their demise," the judgment stated.

According to the Court, the expressions “loss" and “injury" in Section 2(wa) are deliberately broad and expansive, capturing a wide spectrum of harm, including financial damage. “This ensures that victims are not denied justice merely due to technical interpretations of who a complainant is," it said.

In a detailed discussion on the meaning of “charge," the bench acknowledged that while CrPC doesn’t define it exhaustively, judicial precedent recognises it as a formal and precise articulation of the accusations against an accused. “It is more than mere suspicion or public rumour, implies legal process, responsibility, and the communication of specific offences to the accused," the Court said.

“A charge includes the formulation of the alleged crime, the corresponding legal violation, and the identity of the person responsible. It aims to inform the accused clearly and promptly of the allegations faced," it added.

Accordingly, the bench granted liberty to the appellant to file an appeal within four months under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC.

In the underlying case, a Judicial Magistrate had acquitted respondents 1 to 3 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, under Section 255(1) of the CrPC. The Madras High Court subsequently dismissed the appellant’s plea for leave to appeal, declining to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction.

By allowing the appeal and recognising the complainant as a victim entitled to an independent right of appeal, the Supreme Court has effectively broadened the scope of victim rights in cheque dishonour cases ensuring that procedural technicalities do not override substantive justice.

authorimg

Sanya Talwar

Sanya Talwar, Editor at Lawbeat, has been heading the organisation since its inception. After practising in courts for over four years, she discovered her affinity for legal journalism. She has worked previousl...Read More

Sanya Talwar, Editor at Lawbeat, has been heading the organisation since its inception. After practising in courts for over four years, she discovered her affinity for legal journalism. She has worked previousl...

Read More

    Location :
    First Published:

News india Supreme Court Rules Victim Can Appeal Acquittal Without Being Complainant

Read Entire Article