PAWAN KUMAR JALAN S/O SHRI SHUBH KARAN, BY CASTE MAHAJAN, R/O BEHIND POWER HOUSE, MEGHSAR ROAD, RATAN NAGAR, DIST. CHURU, RAJASTHAN Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused-petitioner has filed this Criminal Revision Petition under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Crimial P.C. against the order dated 25.6.2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Sikar in Criminal Appeal No.35/2014 whereby the learned Appellate Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the respondent-complainant under proviso to Sec. 372 Crimial P.C. and by setting aside the order dated 4.3.2014 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sikar in Criminal Complaint Case No.69/2012 whereby the learned trial Court by dismissing the complaint filed by the respondent acquitted the petitioner for the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter to be referred as the N.I.Act ) and remanded the case for fresh consideration and decision.

(2.) Brief relevant facts for the disposal of this petition are that respondent-complainant filed a complaint for offence under Sec. 138 of the N.I.Act against the petitioner before the trial Court and the same was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 4.3.2014 and petitioner was acquitted for the aforesaid offence. Feeling aggrieved by the same, respondent filed an appeal under proviso to Sec. 372 Crimial P.C. before the learned appellate Court which was partly allowed and the order dated 4.3.2014 was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the trial Court for fresh consideration and decision. Feeling aggrieved, now the petitioner-accused is before this Court by way of this revision petition.

(3.) The only submission made on behalf of the petitioner is that it is now well settled legal position that against an order of acquittal passed by the trial Court in respect of a complaint case, appeal under proviso to Sec. 372 Crimial P.C. is not maintainable and the only remedy available to the complainant against such an order of acquittal is to file Special Leave to Appeal before the High Court under Sec. 378 Crimial P.C. but learned appellate Court disregarding the well settled legal position entertained the appeal filed by the respondent and by setting aside the acquittal remanded the case back to the trial Court for fresh consideration whereas the appeal filed by the respondent was liable to be dismissed as not maintainable.