- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16165 CRL.A No. 100366 of 2019 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. 100366 OF 2019 (A-) BETWEEN: SRI. BHEEMANAGOUDA S/O NARAPPAGOUDA PATIL, SINCE DECEASED, BY LRS. 1A. SMT. BHAGIRATHIBAI W/O. BHEEMANAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 73 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: JANAKI SADAN, VIVEKANAND NAGAR, DHARWAD: 580004. 1B. SMT. RENUKA W/O. SHIVARADDI CHAVARADDI, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HOUSE NO.87, MADHURA CHETANA COLONY, NAVALAGUND ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD- 580023. 1C. NARAPPAGOUDA S/O. BHEEMANAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: EMPLOYED, R/O: 5385, BLAIREMORE PL, DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA, U.S.A.- 94568. 1D. SMT. LATA SHANKARGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: JANAKI SADAN, VIVEKANAND NAGAR, DHARWAD: 580004. &APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.11.28 15:24:48 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16165 CRL.A No. 100366 of 2019 AND: SMT. NASRIN AKTAR B. D/O F.A. BELLARY @ NASRIN AKTAR, W/O. A. MUSIR, PROPRIETOR, BUILD TECH CONSTRUCTIONS, SIDDHARUDH NILAYA, H.NO.229, C/O DR. DAYANAND MANE, SHIVANAND NAGAR, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. &RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHANKAR P. HEGDE, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 378(4) OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 03/07/2019 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, DHARWAD IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.3603/2018 AND CONVICT THE RESPONDENT FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 AND 142 OF NI ACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16165 CRL.A No. 100366 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. This appeal is filed by the appellants/complainant being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court. 2. However, the Hon9ble 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 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 1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16165 CRL.A No. 100366 of 2019 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. 6. The Registry shall transmit entire appeal papers including appeal memo to the jurisdictional Sessions Court. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16165 CRL.A No. 100366 of 2019 7. The learned counsel for the appellants 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.: 44