ARTICLE
23 January 2026

Complainant In A Cheque Dishonor Case Under Section 138 Of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("NI Act") Qualifies As A 'Victim' - Supreme Court

VA
Vaish Associates Advocates

Contributor

Established in 1971, Vaish Associates, Advocates is one of the best-known full-service law firms in India. Since its inception, it continues to serve a diverse clientele, including domestic and overseas corporations, multinational companies and individuals. Presently, the Firm has its operations in Delhi, Mumbai and Bengaluru.
As a result, if a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act is dismissed by the Magistrate or if inadequate compensation is awarded, the complainant is now entitled to directly file an appeal, without seeking prior leave of the appropriate High court.
India Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Rajat Jain’s articles from Vaish Associates Advocates are most popular:
  • within Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)
  • in United States
  • with readers working within the Law Firm industries
Vaish Associates Advocates are most popular:
  • within Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Privacy, Government and Public Sector topic(s)

In a significant ruling, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran & Ors., 2025 INSC 804, held that a complainant in a cheque dishonour case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("NI Act") qualifies as a 'victim' under Section 2(wa) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C").

As a result, if a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act is dismissed by the Magistrate or if inadequate compensation is awarded, the complainant is now entitled to directly file an appeal, without seeking prior leave of the appropriate High court.

Legal Position Prior to the Judgment:

Before this ruling, if a Magistrate dismissed a complaint under the NI Act and acquitted the accused, the complainant's only remedy was to seek leave from the High Court under Section 378(4) of the Cr.P.C. Only upon grant of such leave could an appeal be entertained. If leave was denied, the complainant had no further recourse to appeal the acquittal. The only recourse left to the complainant, in such cases, was to challenge the High Court's refusal to grant leave by filing a Special Leave Petition ("SLP") before the Supreme Court.

Impact of the Judgment:

Following this judgment, a complainant in a cheque dishonour case whose complaint is dismissed or who receives inadequate compensation can now directly file an appeal before the Court of Session.

© 2025, Vaish Associates Advocates,
All rights reserved
Advocates, 1st & 11th Floors, Mohan Dev Building 13, Tolstoy Marg New Delhi-110001 (India).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist professional advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. The views expressed in this article are solely of the authors of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More