- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17013 CRL.A No. 100072 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100072 OF 2023 (A-) BETWEEN: SHRI. RAMESH S/O BASAVARAJ MALI, AGE. 67 YEARS, OCC. ADVOCATE AND AGRICULTURE, R/O. PATIL PLOTS RAIBAG, DISTRICT. BELAGAVI- 591317. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SANJAY S. KATAGERI, ADVOCATE) AND: MR. MOHAMMEDISA S/O DAVOOD NAIKWADI, AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. LAND DEVELOPER (CIVIL ENGINEER), R/O. HOSPET GALLI, KVG BANK, CHIKKODI, PIN CODE- 591201. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P.V. GUNJAL, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FIELD U/SEC. 378(4) OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 21.12.2022 PASSED BY THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC RAIBAG, IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 135/2017 (P.C.NO. 72/2016) IN ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED/RESPONDENT HEREIN, BY ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL AND THEREBY CONVICTING THE RESPONDENT HEREIN FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 138 OF N.I. ACT 1881, WITH DOUBLE THE PUNISHMENT AND COSTS, BY ALLOWING THE SAID COMPLAINT IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 135/2017 AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17013 CRL.A No. 100072 of 2023 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 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17013 CRL.A No. 100072 of 2023 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 19.01.2026, without further notice of the concerned Court. 6. The Registry shall transmit entire appeal papers including appeal memo to the jurisdictional Sessions Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17013 CRL.A No. 100072 of 2023 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 SMM List No.: 3 Sl No.: 99