- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28274 CRL.A No. 190 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 190 OF 2019 (378(Cr.PC)/419(BNSS)) BETWEEN: NARAYANA REDDY J S/O LATE J. MUNISWAMY REDDY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1289 8TH MAIN, II STAGE, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM WEST OF CHORD ROAD, BENGALURU-560086. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GANAPATHI BHAT VAJRALLI, ADVOCATE) AND: JOHN RAJKUMAR S/O P.J. TANGARAJ AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.146, 1ST MAIN II CROSS, MANJUNATHANAGAR BENGALURU-560010 ALSO PROPRIETOR, WOOD CRAFTS NO.129/1-2, 2ND PHASE MANJUNATHANAGAR OPP. TO CHURCH WEST OF CHORD ROAD, BENGALURU-560010. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. SOHANI HOLLA AMICUS CURIAE, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SUSHMA LAKSHMI B S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28274 CRL.A No. 190 of 2019 THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S. 378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL PASSED BY THE LEARNED XIII A.C.M.M., BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.19082/2017, DATED 23.11.2018, ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED OF THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF THE N.I ACT AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL 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 1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28274 CRL.A No. 190 of 2019 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 not advert to sub- section (4) of Section 378 of the Cr.PC.” 3. On careful reading of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court supra, it is evident that the complainant, being the 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 Hon’ble Apex Court, in Celestium Financial case 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 the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court. 5. The parties shall appear before the jurisdictional Appellate Court / Sessions Court on 02.07.2026, without further notice of the concerned Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28274 CRL.A No. 190 of 2019 6. The Registry shall transmit the entire appeal papers, including the 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 purposes, this appeal stands disposed of. Ordered accordingly. In view of the disposal of the appeal, pending I.A., if any, does not survive for consideration and the same is also disposed of. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32