6 June 2025 Legal Updates

COMPLAINANT IN S.138 NI ACT CASE CAN FILE APPEAL AGAINST ACQUITTAL AS 'VICTIM' UNDER S.372 PROVISO CRPC: SUPREME COURT

(a) Case Title:

• M/s. Celestium Financial vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. 

(b) Court:

• Supreme Court of India 

(c) Date of Decision:

• April 08, 2025 

(d) Bench:

• Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma 

Facts:

The appellant (Celestium Financial) had filed complaints against the respondents for dishonouring cheques issued to discharge loans. The Trial Court acquitted the respondents, citing lack of proof of legally enforceable debt.  The High Court refused to grant special leave to appeal under Section 378(4) CrPC, stating no prima facie error in the acquittal.  The appellant argued that as a "victim" under Section 2(wa) CrPC, it could directly appeal under proviso to Section 372 CrPC without seeking leave. 

Key Issue:

Whether a complainant in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (dishonour of cheque) can file an appeal against an order of acquittal as a "victim" under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, bypassing the requirement of seeking special leave under Section 378(4) CrPC.

Supreme Court’s Analysis: 

• 1. Definition of "Victim" (Section 2(wa) CrPC):  A victim includes any person who suffered loss or injury due to the accused’s act/omission.  Financial loss (like cheque dishonour) qualifies as "injury." The complainant (payee) in a Section 138 NI Act case is a victim as they suffer economic harm. 
• 2. Proviso to Section 372 CrPC:  Grants victims an unconditional right to appeal against acquittal, lesser conviction, or inadequate compensation. There is no requirement to seek special leave (unlike Section 378(4) CrPC for complainants). 
• 3. Distinction Between Complainant and Victim:  A complainant under Section 200 CrPC may or may not be a victim.  In Section 138 cases, the complainant (payee) is always the victim of the offence. Thus, such a complainant can choose to appeal either under Section 378(4) CrPC (with leave) or proviso to Section 372 CrPC (as a victim, without leave). 
• 4. Interpretation of Rights:  The Court favoured Justice Lokur’s view in Mallikarjun Kodagali (2019), holding that victims have an independent right to appeal without procedural hurdles. The purpose of the proviso to Section 372 is to empower victims, aligning with UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims (1985). 

Decision:

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order and allowed the appellant to file an appeal as a victim under proviso to Section 372 CrPC within 4 months. 

PROTECTION OFFICERS, FREE LEGAL AID: SUPREME COURT ISSUES DIRECTIONS TO STATES, UTS FOR EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT

(a) Case Title:

• We The Women Of India Versus Union Of India & Ors.

(b) Court:

• Supreme Court of India

(c) Date of Decision:

• May 20, 2025

(d) Bench:

• Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.V. Nagarathna, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish Chandra Sharma

Facts of the Case:

A Writ Petition was filed by "We the Women of India" in 2021. The petition concerned the effective implementation of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act). The DV Act was enacted to provide more effective protection for women who are victims of domestic violence, in furtherance of Article 15(3) of the Constitution. The petitioner's counsel highlighted concerns regarding the appointment of Protection Officers, the empanelment of service providers, the provision of shelter homes and medical facilities, the duties of the Government in publicizing the Act, and access to legal aid for aggrieved women.

Issues:

The core issues revolved around the effective implementation of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, specifically concerning:

• Appointment and designation of Protection Officers under Section 8 of the Act.
• Empanelment of Service Providers under Section 10 of the Act.
• Provision of shelter homes under Section 6 of the Act.
• Ensuring medical facilities are available as per Section 7 of the Act.
• Fulfillment of governmental duties, including publicity and coordination, under Section 11 of the Act.
• Access to free legal aid for aggrieved women as per Section 9(1)(d) of the Act read with Section 12 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.

Observations of Court:

The Court noted that the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was enacted two decades prior to provide effective protection to women victims of violence within the family, in furtherance of Article 15(3) of the Constitution.

 The Court acknowledged the need to focus on specific aspects of the Act, including the appointment of dedicated Protection Officers, the empanelment of Service Providers, the provision of shelter homes and medical facilities, and the duties of the Government in giving wide publicity to the Act and ensuring coordination.

The Court also observed that Section 9(1)(d) of the Act, read with Section 12 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, entitles an aggrieved woman to free legal aid. The learned counsel for the respondent-States and Union Territories, and NALSA, assured the Court that they would comply with any directions issued.

Directions of Court:

The Supreme Court issued the following directions:

• Designation of Protection Officers: States and Union Territories are directed to identify officers in the Department of Women and Child at District and Taluka levels and designate them as Protection Officers. These officers shall discharge their duties under Section 9 of the Act.
• Coordination for Designation: The Chief Secretaries of States/Union Territories and the Secretaries of the Department of Women and Child are to coordinate to ensure officers are designated as Protection Officers within six weeks where this has not yet occurred.
• Publicity and Coordination (Section 11): Respondent-States and Union Territories must fulfill their duties under Section 11 by giving wide publicity to the Act through public media, ensuring effective coordination between various Ministries and Departments for implementation, and putting in place protocols for service delivery to women.
• Central Government's Role (Section 11): The Union of India is directed to take adequate and sufficient steps for the implementation of Section 11 of the Act.
• Legal Aid Publicity: The Member Secretary of NALSA is directed to communicate to the Member Secretaries of State/Union Territories Legal Services Authorities, who in turn will communicate to District and Taluka levels, to widely publicize that aggrieved women are entitled to free legal aid and advice under the Act.
• Expeditious Legal Aid Provision: Should any distressed woman approach the Legal Services Authority for legal aid and advice, it must be provided expeditiously.
• Empanelment of Service Providers & Shelter Homes: Concerned departments are to take steps to empanel service providers as per Section 10 of the Act. States and Union Territories are directed to identify and notify shelter homes (such as Nari Niketan, one-stop centers, or other homes for women) at the District and Taluka levels within ten weeks from today, ensuring accessibility for victims of domestic violence.