- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18477 CRL.A No. 100047 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100047 OF 2024 (A-) BETWEEN: NSL SUGARS (TUNGABHADRA) LTD., HAVING ITS FACTORY AT DESANUR VILLAGE, SIRUGUPPA TALUKA BELLARY DISTRICT, KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER MR. RUPESH KUMAR. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. KETHAVATH NARAYAN S/O ASYA NAIK, AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. LABOUR CONTRACTOR, R/O: NO.02 CHINNAKODAPPAL, SC WADA PITRALAM MANDAL, DIST. NIZAMABAD, TELANGANA STATE- 503001. 2. SRI. POWER PONYA NAIK S/O TAVURYA, AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. LABOUR CONTRACTOR, R/O: 80/3, CHINNAKODAPPAL SC WADA PITRALAM MANDAL, DIST. NIZAMABAD, TELANGANA STATE- 503001. …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 378(4) OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT FOR NON-PROSECUTION DATED 10.10.2022 IN CC NO.1276/2015 ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC SIRUGUPPA REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT AND RESTORE THE COMPLAINT TO ITS ORIGINAL STAGE AND ETC. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18477 CRL.A No. 100047 of 2024 THIS 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 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 1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:18477 CRL.A No. 100047 of 2024 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:18477 CRL.A No. 100047 of 2024 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 SMM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 44