- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57293 CRL.A No. 2035 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2035 OF 2018 (A-) BETWEEN: 1. SANJAY ALLOYS PVT LTD NO.2, IST CROSS, POTTERS COLONY, NEW BAMBOO BAZAAR, BENGALURU-560002 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR JAIN PRAKASH GUPTA …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S S SRINIVASA RAO.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. METROCORP INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED NO.17, JAYAMAHAL MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560046 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, DEEPAK KRISHNAPPA 2. SRI DEEPAK KRISHNAPPA S/O KRISHNAPPA NANJAPPA, MANAGING DIRECTOR, METROCORP INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, NO.17, JAYAMAHAL MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560046 3. SMT SUSHMA ANANDU D/O ANANDU HERUR SHAMARAO, DIRECTOR, METROCORP INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, NO.17, JAYAMAHAL MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560046 Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57293 CRL.A No. 2035 of 2018 4. UDAY JANARDHAN REDDY S/O MUNISWAMY JANARDHAN REDDY, DIRECTOR, METROCORP INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, NO.17, JAYAMAHAL MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560046 ALSO AT NO.5/23, PAMPA MAHAKAVI ROAD, SHANKARAPURAM, BENGALURU-560004 5. MR JASON VAN HOONG CHEW S/O KONG HOI CHEW, DIRECTOR, METROCORP INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, NO.17, JAYAMAHAL MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560046 AND ALSO AT 477, RIVER VALLEY ROAD, # 18-02, SINGAPORE, SINGAPORE …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K N SUBBA REDDY.,ADVOCATE FOR R4 (NOC) SRI. M S NARAYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R4; SRI. SHARADA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R4) CRL.A. FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24.06.2017 PASSED BY THE XXI ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.28041/2009 AND RESTORE THE COMPLAINT AGAINST THE RESPONDENT NO.2, 3 AND RESPONDENT NO.5 ON THE FILE OF XXI ADDL.C.M.M., BENGLAURU. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57293 CRL.A No. 2035 of 2018 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/ complainant being aggrieved by the dismissal of complaint vide order dated 24.06.2017 passed in C.C No.28041/2009 by the XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore (for short "the trial Court"). 2. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CELESTIUM FINANCIAL v. A GNANASEKARAN ETC. reported in 2025 SCC ONLINE SC 1320, at paragraph 10 of the judgment, has observed as under: "10. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. 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 Cr. P.C., irrespective of whether he is a complainant or not. Even if the victim of an offence is a - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57293 CRL.A No. 2035 of 2018 complainant, he can still proceed under the proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of Cr. P.C." 3. In the light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's recent clarification of the legal position, it is now evident that the appellant, being the complainant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, is also entitled to file an appeal before the Sessions Court. If this Court were to proceed to hear and decide the appeal at this stage, it could deprive the parties of an available forum, i.e. this Court, for further challenge. 4. Considering the above, it is deemed fit that the present appeal be transferred to the concerned appellate Court of Sessions. Accordingly, I pass the following: O R D E R i. Registry is directed to transfer the entire record of the case to the concerned Principal District & Sessions Judge, who may assign it to the concerned Appellate Court having the jurisdiction and for which - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57293 CRL.A No. 2035 of 2018 purpose, it would be listed before the Principal District & Sessions Judge; ii. The concerned transferee court is directed to issue Court notice to both the parties to appear before the concerned Court, and the concerned Court, thereafter, shall proceed with the case in accordance with law; iii. In case there are applications pending for condonation of delay or any other pending applications, the same also be transferred to be considered by the learned Judge of transferee Court, in accordance with law; iv. Considering the matter has been pending for considerable time, the Appellate Court is requested to make an endeavour to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible; v. The appellant is permitted to carry out necessary amendment in the cause-title and also the provisions thereof; vi. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observations as to the merits of the case and all rights and contentions of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57293 CRL.A No. 2035 of 2018 the parties are left open to be agitated before the Court concerned. 5. In the light of the above observation and directions, appeal stands disposed of. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE KBM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 33