SC Recognizes Cheque Bounce Complainants as ‘Victims’ with Independent Right to Appeal Acquittals
Legal Recognition of the Complainant as a 'Victim'
- The Supreme Court has officially recognized that
complainants in cheque dishonour cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act are to be treated as "victims" under Section 2(wa) of
the CrPC (now Section 2(y) BNSS).
- This recognition is significant because it confers
statutory rights previously unavailable to complainants in such cases.
- Complainants can now directly file an appeal against an
acquittal under Section 372 CrPC (now Section 413 BNSS).
- Crucially, this process does not require prior
permission from the state under Section 378(4) CrPC, which was previously a
procedural hurdle.
Economic Loss as Basis for Victim Status
- The Court emphasized that when a cheque is dishonored,
the complainant inevitably suffers an economic loss.
- This economic loss is the foundation for identifying the
complainant as a "victim" within the statutory framework.
- The fact that cheque bounce cases begin as private
complaints does not strip the complainant of victim status.
- Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act presumes
liability, equating the accused with a charged individual in other criminal
proceedings.
- This presumption activates procedural protections for the
complainant comparable to those available in other criminal cases.
Supreme Court's Position on Appeals
- The Supreme Court overturned the Madras High Court’s
refusal to grant leave under Section 378(4) CrPC.
- The Court stated that the complainant had a direct right
to appeal under the proviso to Section 372 as a “victim,” eliminating the need
for additional procedural permissions.
Summary of Key Points
- Complainants in cheque dishonor cases are recognized as
"victims" by law.
- They may file appeals against acquittals without state
approval.
- The Supreme Court’s decision streamlines the appellate
process and reinforces the complainant’s statutory rights.
