- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16129 CRL.A No. 100017 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100017 OF 2016 (A-) BETWEEN: M/S. SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MUMBAI AND BRANCH OFFICE AT II FLOOR, SRI GAYATHRI TOWERS, GOPALSWAMY ROAD, (MOKA ROAD), I CROSS, GANDHI NAGAR, BELLARY, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY AND CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY R.B. RAMESH BABU S/O R.B. RAMANJINEYULU, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC:SERVICE AS JUNIOR EXECUTIVE, II FLOOR, SHRI GAYATHRI TOWERS, I CROSS, GANDHI NAGAR (MOKA ROAD), BELLARY. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHREEVATSA HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. RATNA W/O V. PRABHAKAR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, PROPRIETRIX OF CHETANA ENGINEERING WORKS, OPPOSITE PETROL BUNK, GANGAVATI ROAD, MEHABOOB COLONY, SINDHANUR- 584128 DIST: RAICHUR. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DEEPAK C. MAGANUR, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.378(4) OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 27.11.2015 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. COURT, BELLARY IN C.C. NO.2289 OF 2007 AND CONVICT THE RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16129 CRL.A No. 100017 of 2016 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court. 2. However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc.1, held in paragraph No.10 as under: “10. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC was inserted in the statute book only with effect from 31.12.2009. The object and reason for such insertion must be realised and must be given its full effect to by a court. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the victim of an offence has the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC, irrespective of whether he is a complainant or 1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16129 CRL.A No. 100017 of 2016 not. Even if the victim of an offence is a complainant, he can still proceed under the proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of the Cr.PC.” 3. On careful reading of the judgment of the Apex Court supra, it is evident that, the complainant being victim has to file an appeal against the order of acquittal before the Jurisdictional Sessions Court by invoking Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 4. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court, in Celestial supra, the appeal by the complainant against the order of acquittal is not maintainable before this Court. Since this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the appeal on merit, the appeal is transferred to jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court. 5. The parties shall appear before the jurisdictional Appellate Court / Sessions Court on 13.01.2026, without further notice of the concerned Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16129 CRL.A No. 100017 of 2016 6. The Registry shall transmit entire appeal papers including appeal memo to the jurisdictional Sessions Court. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant shall have the liberty to carry out the amendment in the cause title and also the provisions thereof. 8. For statistical purpose, this appeal stands disposed off. 9. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE VMB List No.: 4 Sl No.: 1