Thursday, 21, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sukarma Devi vs Ashwani Jaggi @ Ballu And Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 6131 P&H

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 6131 P&H
Judgement Date : 11 December, 2025

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sukarma Devi vs Ashwani Jaggi @ Ballu And Ors on 11 December, 2025

Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
                223
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                                    AT CHANDIGARH

                                                                             CRM-A-1593-2024
                                                                             Date of Decision: 11.12.2025

                SUKARMA DEVI                                                       ....Appellant(s)

                VERSUS

                ASHWANI JAGGI @ BALLU AND ORS                                            ....Respondent(s)

                CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
                CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR

                Present:       Ms. Bindu Bala, Advocate for
                               Mr. Vishal Munjal, Advocate
                               for the appellant.

                               ****
                SUKHVINDER KAUR, J. (Oral)
                Criminal       Complaint Case No.CHI/143 of 2016
                Complaint      Date of decision: 14.08.2024


1. Feeling aggrieved by the trial court's judgment, dismissing the complaint

on merits, and acquitting the accused/respondents, the complainant had come up before

this Court by filing the above-mentioned application for leave to appeal accompanying

the appeal.

2. Counsel for the applicant prays for transfer of appeal to the first Appellate

Court in view of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in "Celestium Financial v.

A. Gnanasekaran, 2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208, decided on 08.04.2025".

3. In Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025(3) RCR(Criminal) 208,

decided on 08.04.2025, Hon'ble Supreme Court holds,

[7.8] In the case of an offence alleged against an accused under Section 138 of the Act, we are of the view that the complainant is indeed the victim owing to the alleged dishonour of a cheque. In the circumstances, the

complainant can proceed as per the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC and he may exercise such an option and he need not then elect to proceed under Section 378 of the CrPC.

[8]. The right to prefer an appeal is no doubt a statutory right and the right to prefer an appeal by an accused against a conviction is not merely a statutory right but can also be construed to be a fundamental right under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. If that is so, then the right of a victim of an offence to prefer an appeal cannot be equated with the right of the State or the complainant to prefer an appeal. Hence, the statutory rigours for filing of an appeal by the State or by a complainant against an order of acquittal cannot be read into the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC so as to restrict the right of a victim to file an appeal on the grounds mentioned therein, when none exists.

[10]. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC was inserted in the statute book only with effect from 31.12.2009. The object and reason for such insertion must be realised and must be given its full effect to by a court. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the victim of an offence has the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, irrespective of whether he is a complainant or not. Even if the victim of an offence is a complainant, he can still proceed under the proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to sub- section (4) of Section 378 of the CrPC.

4. In BNSS, 2023, S. 413 is analogous to S. 372 CrPC, 1973, and thus the

ratio of Celestium Financial shall apply.

5. However, the complainant should not face the burden of filing an appeal

again before the Sessions Court because the law has been interpreted recently. Therefore,

in the interest of Equity, Justice, and Fair play, it would be appropriate to refer this matter

to the Sessions Court, where it will be registered as an Appeal under the Proviso to S. 372

CrPC/413 BNSS, 2023, as applicable. If there is any objection regarding whether it is an

appeal under the CrPC or BNSS, it shall be registered under the Proviso to S. 413 BNSS,

2023, because the CrPC, 1973, has been repealed.

6. Given above, the Registry is to send this file along with the Trial Court's

Record, if any, to the concerned Sessions Division.

7. Leave to appeal is disposed of in the terms mentioned above. All pending

application(s), if any, stand closed. Registry to inform the counsel for the applicant also.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

(SUKHVINDER KAUR) December 11, 2025 JUDGE Sangeeta Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter