Orissa High Court
Tapas Kumar Dash vs Arindum Dash ..... Opp. Parties on 6 November, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLLP No.3 of 2025
Tapas Kumar Dash ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Biswajit Mohapatra
-versus-
Arindum Dash ..... Opp. Parties
Represented By Adv. -
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
06.11.2025
Order No.
I.A. No.4 of 2025
03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner.
3. The present application has been filed under Section 378 of
the Cr.P.C. at the instance of the complainant-victim challenging
the judgment of acquittal of order dated 09.07.2024 passed by the
learned J.MF.C., Balasore in 1CC Case No.604 of 2010.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended
that the Petitioner who was the complainant before the learned trial
Court in the above noted ICC Case, has filed the said complaint
alleging commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of
N.I. Act. He further submitted that after conclusion of the trial, the
trial Court has acquitted the Opposite Party-accused vide judgment
dated 09.07.2024 on the ground that the complainant was not
appearing and taking steps and hence the case was dismissed under
Section 256 of the Cr.P.C. Since the order dated 09.07.2024 is a
final order passed in the 1CC case the same is an appealable one.
5. On a careful analysis of a factual background of the present
case this Court observed that the complainant-Petitioner was a
victim of a cheque bounce and as such he had filed a complaint
alleging commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of
the N.I. Act. At this juncture, this Court would like to refer to the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial vs.
Gnanasekaran Etc. reported in (2025) SCC Online SC 1320, In
the aforesaid reported judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
held that the complainant in a complaint case under Section 138 of
the N.I. Act can very well be equated with the 'victim' as defined
and mentioned in section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly, while
disposing of the aforesaid case the Hon'ble Supreme Court had
granted liberty to the complainant-victim to prefer an appeal
directly under the proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C.
6. In view of the aforesaid position and law, this Court found
that in the present case the complainant can very well be treated as
victim as has been defined under Section 2(wa) of the Cr.P.C.
Therefore, the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Celestium Financial's case (Supra) is squarely applicable to the
present case of the Petitioner. In view of the aforesaid position, this
Court is of the view that the present application at the instance of
the Petitioner is not maintainable. Hence, while disposing of the
present application liberty is granted to the Petitioner to prefer an
appeal against the order dated 09.07.2024 before the appellate
forum along with an application for condonation of delay if any,
within a period of four weeks from today. In such eventuality, the
learned Appellate Court shall consider the delay in preferring the
appeal by taking a lenient view.
7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the CRLLP stands
disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge
Sisir
Designation: Personal Assistant
