Authority: High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad

Order Date: 07/07/2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellant – Joitaram Kanjibhai Chowdhary (original complainant); Respondents – State of Gujarat & Anr.
  • Nature of Proceeding: Criminal Appeal (against acquittal) filed under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and Section 419 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
  • Background: The appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 19.05.2016 of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, C.B.I. Court No.1, Ahmedabad (Rural). The appellant seeks to invoke the right of a complainant‑victim to appeal an acquittal.
  • Legal Precedents Cited:
  • Supreme Court decision in Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 (3) GLH 747) holding that a complainant who is the victim under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has an unconditional right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC (or Section 413 BNSS).
  • Gujarat High Court’s earlier decision in Shivsinh Ganpatsinh Solanki Vs. State of Gujarat (Criminal Misc. Applications Nos. 12753/2019 & 12908/2019).
  • Gujarat High Court’s decision in Thakar Hariprasad Dalsukhram Vs. State of Gujarat (2026 SCC OnLine Guj 569).
  • Key Observations from Supreme Court Judgment (paras 7.8, 7.9, 7.12):

1. The complainant in a Section 138 case is the victim and may file an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 without needing to resort to Section 378.

2. The victim’s right to appeal is unconditional and on par with an accused’s right under Section 374.

3. Parliament intended the proviso to Section 372 to provide a superior right to victims, without any condition precedent.

4. The State’s involvement is absent in Section 138 matters; the complaint is a private complaint, making the complainant the victim.

Final Outcome

  • The appeal is disposed of with a direction to the Registry to transfer the entire case record (including certified copies of the impugned order and all proceedings) to the concerned Sessions Court.
  • Upon transfer, the matter shall be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC / Section 413 of the BNSS and numbered accordingly.
  • The Sessions Court is instructed to issue notice to the parties and to dispose of the matter expeditiously, given the considerable delay.
  • The High Court did not examine the merits of the appeal at this stage.

Topics: Legal Procedure, Victim Appeal Rights