- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18702 CRL.A No. 100304 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100304 OF 2016 (A) BETWEEN: KOTTAGI MALLAPPA S/O. K. NAGANNA, AGE: 69 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YELIGAR ONI, 7TH WARD, SANDUR, BALLARI DIST. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. S.M. KALWAD, ADVOCATE) AND: G. SUBBAN GOUDA S/O. KUMAR GOUDA, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: LORRY OWNER, R/O: 3RD WARD, AGASARA ONI, ANAND BAZAAR, SANDUR, BALLARI DIST. &RESPONDENT (BY SRI. GURURAJ S.TURAMARI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO, ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 19.03.2015 MADE IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.654 OF 2012 PASSED BY THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SANDUR AND TO CONVICT FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I. AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO PAY THE CHEQUE AMOUNT WITH INTEREST THEREON AND ALSO WITH THE PENALTY. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18702 CRL.A No. 100304 of 2016 THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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 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 1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18702 CRL.A No. 100304 of 2016 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 27.01.2026, without further notice of the concerned Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18702 CRL.A No. 100304 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 RH/CT: UMD List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1