Authority: High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad
Order Date: 18/06/2026
Case Overview
- Parties: Appellant – KARTIKEY ENTERPRISE THRO PRAMODBHAI MADHAVLAL SHAH; Respondents – STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
- Proceedings: Criminal Appeal (against acquittal) No. 1276 of 2023 filed under Section 378 CrPC and Section 419 BNSS challenging the Trial Court’s order dated 30.07.2022 that acquitted the accused of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
- Legal Background: The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran (2025 (3) GLH 747), which held that the complainant in a Section 138 case is the victim and may file an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC (or Section 413 BNSS) without needing to resort to Section 378.
- Additional References: The Court also cited its own earlier decision in Shivsinh Ganpatsinh Solanki Vs. State of Gujarat (Criminal Misc. Applications Nos. 12753/2019 & 12908/2019) and the recent Supreme Court pending SLP No. 12350/2024, noting that a larger Bench’s pronouncement is awaited.
- Observations: The Supreme Court’s paras 7.8, 7.9, and 7.12 were quoted, emphasizing the victim’s unconditional right to appeal, the parity with an accused’s right under Section 374 CrPC, and the legislative intent behind the proviso to Section 372.
Final Outcome
- The appeal is disposed of with a direction 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 dispose of the matter expeditiously, given the pendency of the case for a considerable period.
- The High Court did not examine the merits of the appeal at this stage.
Topics: Legal Precedent, Criminal Procedure