- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22662 CRL.A No. 414 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 414 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. K.M. MALLIKARJUNAPPA (GUMMANURU) S/O MASTOORAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. ADVOCATE R/O LIG-1637 A BLOCK, 8TH MAIN ROAD, 9TH CROSS, KHEB KUNDAVADA, DAVANGERE - 577006 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHETAN JADHAV, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. H N HONNAPPA S/O UNKNOWN AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS OCC. RETIRED POLICE OFFICER PSI RANK S.I. NO. 818675 RURAL POLICE STATION DAVANAGERE R/AT DAVANAGERE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT POLICE DCRB OFFICER, DEVARAJ URS BADAVANE, Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22662 CRL.A No. 414 of 2025 C BLOCK, DAVANAGERE - 577006. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DHARANISHA C.N., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.A FILED U/S 378(4) CR.PC (FILED U/S 419(4) OF BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 29.09.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT DAVANGERE IN C.C.NO.1217/2019 AND SUBSEQUENTLY CONVICT THE RESPONDENT / ACCUSED NO.2 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 499, 504, 503, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant submits a Memo for Conversion which reads as under: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22662 CRL.A No. 414 of 2025 “The appellant here in most humbly submits the following: The appellant herein had preferred a complaint against the Respondent for offences punishable under Sections 499, 504, 503, 506 R/w 34 of IPC. The II Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC after holding trial in CC.No.1217/2019 was pleased to acquit the respondent of all the offences. Aggrieved by the same the Appellant preferred an Appeal against acquittal before I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere in Crl.A.117/2023. However, the learned Sessions Judge without entering into the merits of the matter dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction under Section 378 of Cr.P.C and directed the appellant to approach the Hon’ble High Court. In Lieu, the appellant has preferred this instant appeal. However, in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial v A. Ganasekaran 2025 SCC Online SC 1320 and this Hon’ble Court in Thomas Mani v G.Shankar NC:2025: KHC:8113, its settled principle that the victim can prefer an appeal against acquittal before the First Appellate Court under Section 372 of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22662 CRL.A No. 414 of 2025 Cr.P.C. Therefore, it is prayed to the Hon’ble High Court that the present matter may be remanded back to the First Appellate Court for reconsideration under Section 372 of Cr.P.C.” 2. Considering the said memo, the appeal stands disposed of accordingly. Liberty is reserved. The Appellate Court is directed to consider the delay caused by approaching this Court in terms of Section 14 of the Limitations Act, 1963. 3. In view of disposal of the appeal, all pending I.A.’s are disposed of accordingly. 4. The appellant shall file appeal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this Order. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39