Complainant In Section 138 NI Act Case Can File Appeal Against Acquittal Before Sessions Court As 'Victim' Under Proviso To Section 372 CrPC: Andhra Pradesh High Court

"If the complainant is also a victim, they can prefer appeal under the proviso to section 372 CrPC, in the case of dishonoured cheque also." Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a complainant in a dishonoured cheque case, being a 'victim' of the offence, is entitled to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal before the concerned Sessions Court under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

A single-judge bench of Justice B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi, in an order dated July 8, 2026, observed that this right is available to complainants in Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I. Act) proceedings as they fall within the definition of a victim.

The appellant, Chilamakuri Narayana Reddy, had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act against the accused in C.C.No.19 of 2022. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Gannavaram, vide judgment dated August 26, 2025, found the accused not guilty and acquitted them under Section 255(1) of the CrPC. Aggrieved by this, the complainant initially preferred an appeal before the High Court under Section 378(4) of the CrPC, but subsequently sought to withdraw and file it before the Sessions Court.

The primary question before the court was whether a complainant in a Section 138 N.I. Act case is entitled to prefer an appeal against acquittal before the Sessions Court under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC. The court also considered the applicability of the Supreme Court's ruling in M/s.Celestium Financial Vs. A.Gnanasekaran to such proceedings.

Court Relies On Apex Court Precedent Defining 'Victim' Rights

The Court took note of the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, who argued that the appeal grounds should be returned to permit the filing of the appeal before the Sessions Court. This request was grounded in the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC and supported by the recent jurisprudence of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Complainant In Cheque Bounce Cases Entitled To Benefit Of Section 372 CrPC

Justice Chakravarthi highlighted that the Supreme Court in M/s.Celestium Financial Vs. A.Gnanasekaran (2025 Livelaw (SC) 666) has clarified the standing of a complainant. The bench noted that if the complainant is also a victim, they can prefer an appeal under the proviso to section 372 CrPC, even in cases involving dishonoured cheques.

"If the complainant is also a victim, they can prefer appeal under the proviso to section 372 CrPC, in the case of dishonoured cheque also."

Equivalency Under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023

The Court further observed that the legal position established under the CrPC remains relevant under the new criminal laws. It noted that the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC is equivalent to Section 413 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. This ensures that the procedural right of a victim to appeal against acquittal in the Sessions Court is preserved.

Directions To Registry For Return Of Original Bundle

In view of the undisputed fact that the appellant is a complainant and a victim in a Section 138 N.I. Act case, the Court held that the appeal is maintainable before the Sessions Court. Consequently, the High Court directed its Registry to return the original bundle and the delay condonation petition to the appellant to facilitate the re-filing of the case.

"Registry is directed to return the original bundle forthwith to the appellant along with delay condone petition, to enable him to represent the appeal within 4 (four) weeks... before the concerned Sessions Court in accordance with law."

Sessions Court Directed To Proceed With Appeal and Delay Petition

The Court clarified that once the appeal is represented before the concerned Sessions Court, that court must proceed with the matter in accordance with the law. This includes adjudicating upon the delay condonation petition filed by the appellant along with the main appeal.

The High Court concluded that the complainant has the legal standing to approach the Sessions Court under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC. By returning the appeal, the Court reaffirmed that the status of a 'victim' in private complaints under the N.I. Act allows for a broader choice of appellate forums as per Supreme Court guidelines.

Date of Decision: 08 July 2026