Supreme Court: Victim Can Appeal Against Acquittal Even If Not the Complainant

📌 Case Name: M/s Celestium Financial v A Gnanasekaran

📌 Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 666

📌 Judges: Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma

🔹 What is the case about?

The Supreme Court recently gave an important decision where it said that a victim of a crime can file an appeal against the acquittal of the accused—even if the victim did not file the complaint themselves.

This means that if someone is affected by a crime (for example, a cheque bounce), they are allowed to challenge the court’s decision if the accused is found not guilty.

🔹 What law did the Court discuss?

The Court mainly talked about Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

This section deals with appeals.

A proviso was added to this section in 2009, which allows victims to file an appeal if:

The accused is acquitted

The accused is given a lesser punishment

The case is closed without proper punishment

🔹 Key points made by the Supreme Court

Victim has full right to appeal

The Court said that this special right under Section 372 must be given full meaning. Even if the victim is not the complainant, they can still appeal.

Victim and accused have equal rights

Just like an accused person has the full right to appeal if they are convicted, a victim should also have the full right to appeal if the accused is acquitted.

No need for High Court permission

Normally, if a complainant wants to appeal an acquittal, they need permission from the High Court under Section 378(4). But victims do not need this permission under Section 372’s proviso.

Cheque bounce cases apply too

The Court said that a person whose cheque is dishonoured (bounced) is a victim under the CrPC. Even if they are the complainant in a private case (under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act), they can still file an appeal as a victim.

Parliament gave more rights to victims

The Court noted that when Parliament added the proviso to Section 372, it wanted to give victims stronger rights than even complainants or the State in some situations.

🔹 What does this mean in simple terms?

If a person suffers because of a crime—like in a cheque bounce case—they are a victim.

If the accused is acquitted (found not guilty), the victim can go to a higher court and appeal—even if they were not the person who filed the complaint.

They do not need the High Court’s special permission to do this.

🔹 Why is this important?

This judgment strengthens the rights of victims. It allows them to directly approach the court and fight for justice without depending on the police, State, or formal permission.

Especially in cheque bounce cases (which are usually private cases), this ruling makes sure that the affected person can take legal steps if the court wrongly lets the accused go free.

🔹 Who were the lawyers?

For the Petitioner: Advocate Danish Zubair Khan

For the Respondent: Advocate G Sivabalamurugan

🔹Conclusion:-

The Supreme Court has made it clear:

A victim has a strong and independent right to appeal if they are not satisfied with the court’s decision—even if they didn’t file the complaint.

This ensures better access to justice and strengthens the victim’s role in the legal system.