We're the superheroes of the legal world

10/02/2026

⚖️ कायदा म्हणजे सेवा
न्याय, सत्य आणि संविधानाच्या मूल्यांनुसार कायदेशीर माहिती देणे हेच आमचे कर्तव्य आहे.
हा पोस्ट केवळ कायदेशीर जनजागृतीसाठी आहे.

13/09/2025

आद. बाळासाहेब आंबेडकर साहेब मा. उच्च न्यायालय, मुंबई खंडपीठ औरंगाबाद येथे सोमनाथ सूर्यवंशी पोलीस कोठडी तील मारहाणी मुळे झालेल्या हत्या प्रकरणात स्वतः प्रकरण चालवत असून दि. 12/09/2025 च्या सुनावणी नंतर पत्रकार यांना बोलतांना....!

17/06/2025

👍🏾In light of the Supreme Court's landmark judgment in *M/s. Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran* (2025 INSC 804), **yes**, the Sessions Court will register an appeal against acquittal as the first appeal by a complainant (treated as a 'victim') under the proviso to **Section 372 CrPC**. Here’s a detailed breakdown:

# # # Key Legal Position After the Judgment:
1. **Complainant = Victim**:
The Supreme Court ruled that a complainant in a **Section 138 NI Act** case (cheque dishonour) is a "victim" under **Section 2(wa) CrPC**, as they suffer economic loss due to the offence. Thus, they can directly appeal under **Section 372 proviso** without seeking special leave from the High Court under **Section 378(4)**.

2. **Appeal to Sessions Court**:
The proviso to Section 372 allows victims to file appeals against acquittal **before the court empowered to hear appeals from convictions by the trial court** (typically the Sessions Court for magistrate trials). This bypasses the stricter requirements of Section 378(4), which mandates High Court leave for complainants.

3. **Overruling Contrary Views**:
The judgment implicitly overrules earlier High Court decisions (e.g., *Kushal Singanjude*, Bombay HC, 2019) that barred complainants from using Section 372, holding that NI Act complainants must use Section 378(4). The Supreme Court clarified that such an interpretation would undermine the 2009 amendment’s intent to empower victims.

4. **Procedure for Filing**:
- The victim-complainant must file the appeal **within the prescribed limitation period** (the Supreme Court allowed 4 months in *Celestium*).
- The appeal challenges acquittal, lesser conviction, or inadequate compensation.
- No prior leave or state intervention is required, unlike Section 378 appeals.

# # # Practical Implications:
- **Sessions Court’s Role**: The Sessions Court is now obligated to entertain such appeals as **first appeals** under Section 372 proviso, treating them on par with state appeals against acquittal.
- **Distinction from Section 378**: Unlike Section 378 (which requires High Court leave and is narrower), Section 372 proviso grants an **unconditional right** to victims, aligning with the accused’s right to appeal under Article 21.

# # # Conclusion:
Post-*Celestium*, the Sessions Court **must register and adjudicate** appeals filed by complainants (as victims) under Section 372 proviso, provided the procedural requirements are met. This ensures faster redressal without the bottleneck of High Court leave.

For further details, refer to the Supreme Court’s full judgment or comparative analyses of Sections 372 and 378.

25/09/2024

जिल्हा व सत्र न्यायालय जालना येथे भा. द.वि. कलम 302 हत्या प्रकरणात पत्नीचा चाकूने गळा कापून निर्घृणपणे हत्या करणाऱ्या पतीस सक्त जन्मठेपेची शिक्षा देण्यात आली या प्रकरणात मी ऍड.सचिन वाघमारे व ऍड. मिलिंद वाहुळे आम्ही assist to pp(फिर्यादी चे वकील) म्हणून काम पाहिले होते .

21/08/2024

27/09/2023

निसर्गाच्या सानिध्यात ...!

06/12/2022

मोजू तरी कशी उंची तुमच्या कर्तृत्वाची, तूम्ही जगाला शिकवली व्याख्या माणसातल्या माणुसकीची..