- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16619 CRL.A No. 100209 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100209 OF 2024 (A-) BETWEEN: V.G. VENKATARAMANA RAO S/O LATE V.S. GOVINDA RAO, AGE. 70 YEARS, OCC. MONEY LENDER R/O. C/O. SHRINAGAR ENTERPRISES OLD BUS-STAND ROAD, HOSAPETE, TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR, REPRESENTED BY HIS SON GPA HOLDER BY NAME V. SRIKANTH S/O V.G. VENKATARAMANA, AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. MONEY LENDER, R/O. SHRINAGAR ENTERPRISES, OLD BUS-STAND ROAD, NEAR SUB-REGISTRAR OFFICE, HOSAPETE, TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA- 583201. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. AMAREGOUDA M., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. B. BABU S/O B. GULAM, AGE. 73 YEARS, OCC. GULAM ENGINEERING WORKS, R/O. 12TH WARD, BANAGAR STREET, CHITWADIGI HOSAPETE, TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR- 583211. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SABEEL AHMED, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 378(4) OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HOSAPETE AT BAGALKOTE IN C.C.NO. 33/2021 DATED 24.01.2024 AND CONSEQUENTLY THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED BE CONVICTED AND PUNISHED WITH THE U/SEC. 138 OF N.I. ACT. AND ISSUED DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED TO MAKE IMMEDIATE PAYMENT OF RS.6,14,000/- ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 16% PER ANNUM OR DOUBLE THE CHEQUE AMOUNT. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16619 CRL.A No. 100209 of 2024 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, 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 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 1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16619 CRL.A No. 100209 of 2024 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 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. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16619 CRL.A No. 100209 of 2024 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 PJ List No.: 4 Sl No.: 31