- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48177 CRL.A No. 415 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.415 OF 2020 (A) BETWEEN: V. NALLIYANAGOUNDER S/O LATE. VEERAKUTTIGOUNDER, SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY HIS LR’S A) JAYALAKSHMI W/O. LATE NALLIYANAGOUNDER, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT. LAKKAVANHALLY, HIRIYUR TALUK - 577 501. B) AMUDHA D/O. LATE NALLIYANA GOUNDER, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT. 2/1, SAANKARAPALYAM, KUMARIPALLAYAM (P), MOHANUR, NAMAKKAL DIST. TAMIL NADU – 637 001. C) N. ANURADHA D/O. LATE NALLIYANA GOUNDER, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT. 111, 3RD STREET, SRIPATHI NAGAR, NANJUNDAPURA ROAD, COIMBATORE – 641036. D) N. RAMESH S/O. LATE NALLIYANAGOUNDER, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT. LAKKAVANHALLY, HIRIYUR TALUK – 577 501. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48177 CRL.A No. 415 of 2020 E) LAKSHMI D/O. LATE NALLIYANAGOUNDER, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT. 19/45, MURUGAN NAGAR, MASAKLIPALAYAM, UPPALIPALAYAM POST, COIMBATORE – 641 015. … APPELLANTS (BY SRI. GOVINDARAJU L., ADVOCATE AND SRI. AJAYA GOVINDARAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: V. VIJAY KUMAR S/O. ERAPPA, R/O. DODDAGATA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, HIRIYUR TALUK – 577 598. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P.B. AJIT, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378 (4) CR.P.C., PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED 02.12.2019 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HIRIYUR IN C.C.NO.543/2018 AND THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED MY KINDLY BE CONVICTED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES AND ETC.,. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 13.06.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48177 CRL.A No. 415 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CAV JUDGMENT 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 1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48177 CRL.A No. 415 of 2020 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. 6. The Registry shall transmit entire appeal papers including appeal memo to the jurisdictional Sessions Court. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48177 CRL.A No. 415 of 2020 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 MRK/CT: UMD List No.: 19 Sl No.: 12