Shriram Transport Finance Co. ... vs Ballu Parihar
2022 Latest Caselaw 1383 MP

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.59497/2021 (SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO. LTD. VS. BALLU PARIHAR)

Through Video Conferencing

Gwalior, Dated : 31/01/2022

Shri Munnalal Tomar, learned counsel for the applicant.

The office has raised an objection with regard to the

maintainability of this application under Section 378 of Cr.P.C. for

grant of leave to appeal.

The necessary facts for disposal of the present application is

that the complaint filed by the applicant under Section 138 of

Negotiable Instrument Act has been dismissed by JMFC, District

Shivpuri by judgment dated 15/07/2021 passed in Criminal Case

No.133/2018. Against the said judgment, the applicant filed Criminal

Appeal No.5489/2021, which was withdrawn with liberty to file an

application for grant of leave to appeal. Thereafter, the present

application has been filed and the office has raised an objection with

regard to the maintainability of the application filed under Section

378 of Cr.P.C.

In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the

case of Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) Represented Through Legal

Representatives Vs. State of Karnataka and Others reported in

(2019) 2 SCC 752, coupled with the fact that the applicant is not

only the complainant, but since the cheque given to him had stood

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.59497/2021 (SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO. LTD. VS. BALLU PARIHAR)

bounced, therefore, it can be safely kept in the category of victim.

Section 372 of Cr.P.C. reads as under:-

"372. No appeal to lie unless otherwise provided.-- No appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court except as provided for by this Code by any other law for the time being in force:

[Provided that the victim shall have a right to prefer an appeal against any order passed by the Court acquitting the accused or convicting for a lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation, and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction of such Court.]"

Thus, where the complaint filed by the applicant under Section

138 of N.I.Act is rejected, then he has right to file an appeal under

Section 372 of Cr.P.C. The proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. clearly

points out that the appeal would lie to the Court of which an appeal

ordinary lies against the order of conviction of said Court.

In the present case, the impugned judgment was passed by the

Court of JMFC, therefore, against his judgment of conviction, the

appeal lies before the Sessions Court. In view of the proviso to

Section 372 of Cr.P.C. the appeal against the judgment of acquittal

would also lie to the Sessions Court.

Accordingly, the counsel for the applicant seeks permission of

this Court to withdraw this application with liberty to file an appeal

under Section 372 of Cr.P.C. before the Court of competent

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.59497/2021 (SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO. LTD. VS. BALLU PARIHAR)

jurisdiction.

With aforesaid liberty, the application is dismissed as

withdrawn.

On filing the photocopy of the impugned judgment, the office

is directed to return the certified copy of the judgment to the counsel

for the applicant.

                                                                     (G.S. Ahluwalia)
Pj'S/-                                                                     Judge
         Digitally signed by
         PRINCEE BARAIYA
         Date: 2022.01.31
         17:49:27 -08'00'