logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 APHC 1430 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Case No : Criminal Appeal (Sr) No. 8174 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI
Parties : Nukanaboina Reddy Siva Narayana Yadav Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep By Its Public Prosecutorhigh Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Rama Mohan Rao Kotha, Advocate. For the Respondent: ----------
Date of Judgment : 05-08-2026
Head Note :-
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 419 (4) -
Judgment :-

(Prayer: IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased grant leave to file appeal against the order passed by the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kadapa in CC 240/2020, dated 01.07.2026 in the interest of justice

1. Heard Sri Rama Mohan Rao Kotha, learned counsel for the appellant/complainant. He would submit that the appeal grounds may be returned, permitting the appellant to file appeal before concerned Sessions Court as per proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C., in the light of the Judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s.Celestium Financial Vs. A.Gnanasekaran (2025 Livelaw (SC) 666).

2. This appeal is preferred challenging the Judgment dated 01.07.2026 rendered in C.C.No.240 of 2020 on the file of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kadapa.

3. The learned trial Court found the accused not guilty for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Hence, the complainant preferred the appeal before this Court under Section 419 (4) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

4. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the above judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the appellant held that “if the complainant is also a victim, they can prefer appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C., in the case of dishonoured cheque also”.

5. Undisputedly, the present appeal is preferred by the complainant, who is also a victim in a complaint filed for the offence U/secs.138 of N.I. Act. Therefore, the complainant can prefer the appeal before the concerned Sessions Court under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C., equivalent to Section 413 of BNSS, 2023.

6. In the light of foregoing discussion, Registry is directed to return the original bundle forthwith to the appellant, to enable him to represent the appeal within four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order, before the concerned Sessions Court in accordance with law. On such representation, concerned Sessions Court shall proceed with the appeal in accordance with law.

7. Accordingly, the appeal is returned.
 
  CDJLawJournal