[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sunil Kumar vs Surinder Kumar And Others on 23 January, 2026
CRM-A-439-2024 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
112
CRM-A-439-2024
SUNIL KUMAR ....PETITIONER
V/s
SURINDER KUMAR AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS
Date of decision:23.01.2026
Date of uploading:23.01.2026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL
Present: Ms. Kirat Bir Kaur, Advocate
for the appellant/applicant.
Mr. Pankaj Bains, Advocate for the respondents.
*****
SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)
1. The substantive prayer made in the present appeal reads, thus:
""It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the judgment of acquittal
passed by Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sunam, vide Judgment
dated 20.02.2024 be set aside and the accused be held guilty and be
punished as per law."
Alongwith an appeal, an application for grant of leave has also
been preferred under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C., 1973
2. I have heard learned counsel for the rival parties and have
perused the paper-book at some length.
3. Before proceeding to hear the application (for grant of special
leave to appeal)/appeal on merits thereof, it would be apposite to refer herein
to a judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s Celestium
Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 2025 INSC 804 : 2025(3) RCR
(Criminal) 208, relevant whereof reads as under:
"6.4 On a reading of the definition of 'victim', it is clear that the said
expression is initially exhaustive and thereafter inclusive. The expression
1 of 4
'victim' means a person who has suffered any loss or injury. The loss or
injury could be either physical, mental, a financial loss or injury. The
expression injury could also be construed as a legal injury in a wider
sense and not just a physical or a mental injury. The loss or injury must be
caused by reason of an act or omission for which the accused person has
been charged. Thus, it can be both by a positive act or negatively by an
omission which is at the instance of the accused and for which such
accused has been charged. Further, the expression 'victim' also includes
his/her guardian or legal heir in the case of demise of the victim.
6.5 Thus, the expression 'victim' has been couched in a broad manner
so as to include a person who has suffered any loss or injury. The
expressions 'loss' or 'injury' themselves are of a very broad import which
expressions also enlarge the scope of the expression 'victim'. Further, the
expression 'victim' includes not only the person who has suffered any loss
or injury caused by reason of any act or omission for which the accused
person has been charged but also includes his or her guardian or legal
heir which means that the definition of victim is inclusive in nature.
6.6 Having regard to the insertion of the proviso to Section 372 of the
CrPC, we find that in the case of a victim who seeks to file an appeal, he
or she could proceed under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC in the
circumstances mentioned therein and need not prefer an appeal by
invoking Section 378(4) of the CrPC which is in respect of appeals to be
filed by a complainant. It may be that the complainant is a victim in
certain cases and therefore, the victim has the right to file an appeal under
the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC and need not proceed under
Section 378(4) of the CrPC. However, if the complainant is not a victim
and intends to file an appeal, in such a case a complainant would have to
proceed under Section 378 of the CrPC which circumscribes the right to
file an appeal by virtue of the conditions which are stipulated under the
said Section.
xxx xxx xxx xxx
7.11 A reading of section 378 would clearly indicate that in case the
complainant intends to file an appeal against the order of acquittal, his
right is circumscribed by certain conditions precedent. When an appeal is
to be preferred by a complainant, the first question is, whether, the
complainant is also the victim or only an informant. If the complainant is
not a victim and the case is instituted upon a complaint, then sub-section
(4) requires that the complainant must seek special leave to appeal from
an order of acquittal from the High Court. As noted under sub-section (6),
if the application under sub-section (4) for grant of special leave to appeal
2 of 4
from the order of acquittal is refused, no appeal from that order of
acquittal would lie, inter alia, under sub-section (1) of Section 378.
However, if the complainant is also a victim, he could proceed under the
proviso to Section 372, in which case the rigour of sub-section (4) of
Section 378, which mandates obtaining special leave to appeal, would not
arise at all, as he can prefer an appeal as a victim and as a matter of
right. Thus, if a victim who is a complainant, proceeds under Section 378,
the necessity of seeking special leave to appeal would arise but if a victim
whether he is a complainant or not, files an appeal in terms of proviso to
Section 372, then the mandate of seeking special leave to appeal would not
arise.
xxx xxx xxx xxx
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. Ergo; in view of the dicta of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s
Celestium Financial (supra); the present appeal, along with accompanying
application(s), is disposed of as hereunder:
(i) The present appeal, along with accompanying application(s), is
remitted to the learned Sessions Judge, Sangrur with a direction to treat the
same as having been filed under Section 372 of Cr.P.C., 1973/Section 413 of
BNSS, 2023. The said learned Sessions Judge may entrust the appeal to
himself or assign it to another Court of competent jurisdiction for its
disposal, as per law.
(ii) Needless to clarify that this Court has not delved into the merits
of the appeal as also along with accompanying application(s); and the same
is left open for consideration of the concerned learned Sessions Court, which
3 of 4
shall indubitably adjudicate the same without getting influenced by any
observation made hereinabove.
(iii). The Registry is directed to send, expeditiously, the complete
records of the present appeal (including the paper-book) to the said learned
Sessions Judge.
(SUMEET GOEL)
JUDGE
23.01.2026
jatin
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
4 of 4
