Cheque Dishonour | Complainant Has Statutory Right To Appeal Against Acquittal, Revision Petition Not Maintainable: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that a complainant in a cheque dishonour case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) has a statutory right to file an appeal against acquittal under the proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), and therefore cannot invoke the High Court's revisional jurisdiction as an alternative remedy.

Justice K Babu delivered the judgment while dismissing two criminal revision petitions filed by a complainant challenging the acquittal of the accused by the Sessions Court.

The petitioner had filed two private complaints before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Piravom, alleging offences under Section 138 of the NI Act. The trial court convicted the accused in both cases. However, on appeal, the Additional District and Sessions Court, Muvattupuzha, acquitted the accused.

Instead of filing appeals, the complainant approached the High Court through criminal revision petitions under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC.

The Registry noted a specific defect on the matter which was whether a criminal revision petition was the proper remedy against an acquittal in a complaint case.

The Court examined whether a complainant in a Section 138 NI Act case qualifies as a “victim” under Section 2(wa) CrPC. Section 2(wa) defines a “victim” as a person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the act or omission for which the accused has been charged.

The Court noted that in cheque dishonour cases, the payee or holder in due course suffers financial loss due to dishonour. The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Celestium Financial (M/s) v. A Gnanasekaran [2025 (4) KHC 189], which held that a complainant under Section 138 NI Act is a victim.

The Supreme Court had clarified that if a complainant is also a victim, they may proceed under the proviso to Section 372 without being subjected to the rigour of seeking special leave. The High Court reiterated that the victim's right to appeal is substantive and unconditional, designed to place the victim on par with an accused's statutory right to appeal under Section 374 CrPC.

“The result of the above discussion is that a person who files a complaint alleging offence under Section 138 of the NI Act has the right to prefer appeal under Section 378 or proviso to Section 372 of Cr.PC” Court noted

The Court thus held that since an appeal lies under the Code, no proceeding by way of revision shall be entertained as they could have filed the appeal.

With the observations, the Court dismissed the revision petition and granted liberty to the petitioner to prefer appeal under the Code or the Sanhita.

Case Title: Liji v State of Kerala and connected matter

Case No: Crl. Rev. Pet 58/ 2026 and connected matter

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 96

Counsel for Revision Petitioner: Abhiram T K, Arun George D, S Krishna Kumar

Counsel for Respondents: E C Bineesh (PP)

Click Here To Read/ Download Judgment