- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57297 CRL.A No. 1582 of 2019 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. 1582 OF 2019 (A-) BETWEEN: 1. SMT NAGALAKSHMI W/O SR A N PANDURANGAN AGE 72 YEARS, R/O NO.44, GROUND FLOOR IST CROSS, GOWRAV NAGAR J P NAGAR, 7TH PHASE BANGALORE-560078 SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR SRI A.N.PANDURANGAPPA S/O LATE A.C. NANJUNDA SETTY R/O 44, GROUND FLOOR 1ST CROSS GOWRAV NAGAR, J.P NAGAR 7TH PHASE BENGALRUU 560 078 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SAGAR B B.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. T G M NAGARAJ S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED ABOUT MAJOR R/O D.NO.51, MITRA ENCLAVE FLAT NO.102, 2ND CROSS GOWRAV NAGAR, J P NAGAR 7TH PHASE, BANGALORE …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57297 CRL.A No. 1582 of 2019 CRL.A FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16.02.2018 PASSED BY THE XVI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.25789/2015 AND RESTORE C.C.NO.25789/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XVI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: 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 29.06.2017 passed in C.C No.25788/2015 by the XVI 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57297 CRL.A No. 1582 of 2019 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 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: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57297 CRL.A No. 1582 of 2019 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 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; - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:57297 CRL.A No. 1582 of 2019 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 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.: 39