- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3810 CRL.A No. 662 of 2023 C/W CRL.A No. 668 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 662 OF 2023 (A) C/W CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 668 OF 2023 IN CRL.A No. 662/2023 BETWEEN: 1. FLORANCE FLORA FARM NO.53/54, THIPPUR POST, SUTTAHALLI VILLAGE, SASALU HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, KARNATAKA - 561 204. REP. BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER, FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, MR.A.A. JOHNSON, S/O A.L.ANTONY, AGED 57 YEARS. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRASANNA D P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. OOTY FLORA P-64, CHURCH ROAD, BEDFORD, COONOOR - 643 101, THE NILGIRIS, TAMILNADU STATE, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR.JESURAJA BAKTHAN DANIEL. 2. MR.VIJAY LOURDARAJ AGED 47 YEARS, C/O JAGADESHWARI AND MR.SURESH RAJ, FLAT NO.2127/2003, FIRST FLOOR, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3810 CRL.A No. 662 of 2023 C/W CRL.A No. 668 of 2023 9TH MAIN, D BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 092, AND ALSO AT S/O JOSEPH PALRAJ, DOOR NO.107, THIRUVARANGAM COMPOUND, D.B.ALWARPET, COONOOR, THE NILGIRIS, TAMILNADU STATE. 3. MR.JESURAJA BAKTHAN DANIEL AGED 52 YEARS, S/O MR.DHANSINGH RAJ R/AT DOOR NO.47/7D ASIR COMPOUND, HEAD POST OFFICE, COONOOR - 643 101. THE NILGIRIS, TAMILNADU. 4. MR.J.JAMES AGED 4 YEARS, S/O MR.A.JOSEPH JAGANATHAN, R/AT NO.100, STANELY PARK ROAD, OTTUPATRAI, COONOOR - 643 101 THE NILGIRIS, TAMILNADU STATE. 5. BENJAMIN PAUL DANIEL AGED 55 YEARS, S/O LATE J DENIEL, R/AT NO.17, BROOKLANDA, COONOOR 643 101 THE NILGIRIS TAMIL NADU STATE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MUJTABA H., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT PASSED IN C.C.NO.832/2018, ON THE FILE OF SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AT BANGALORE (SCCH-2) DATED 19.01.2023, BY TRIAL COURT AND CONVICT THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO 5 BY IMPOSING THE FINE OF TWICE THE CHEQUE AMOUNT AND SENTENCE THEM FOR MAXIMUM PUNISHMENT AS PRESCRIBED FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER 138 OF NI ACT BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT PASSED AND AWARD MAXIMUM COMPENSATION TO THE APPEALLANT/COMPLAINANT. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3810 CRL.A No. 662 of 2023 C/W CRL.A No. 668 of 2023 IN CRL.A NO. 668/2023 BETWEEN: 1. FLORANCE FLORAM FARM NO 53/54, THIPPUR POST, SUTTAHALLI VILLAGE, SASALU HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, KARNATAKA 561 204, REP BY ITS SENIOR MANGER, FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, MR A A JOHNSON, S/O A L ANTONY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRASANNA D P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. OOTY FLORA NO -64, CHURCH ROAD, BEDFORD, COONOOR 643101 THE NILGIRIS, TAMILNADU STATE, REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR JESURAJA BAKTHAN DANIEL. 2. MR VIJAY LOUDARAJ AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, C/O JAGADESHWARI AND MR SURESH RAJ, FLAT NO 2127/2003, FIRST FLOOR, 9TH MAIN, D-BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR. BANGALORE 560 092, AND ALSO AT S/O JOSEPH PALRAJ, DOOR NO 107, THIRUVARANGAM COMPOUND, D B ALWARPET, COONOOR, THE NILGIRIS, TAMILNADU STATE. 3. MR JESURAJA BAKTHAN DANIEL AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O MR DHANSINGH RAJ, R/AT DOOOR NO 47/87D, ASIR COMPOUND, HEAD POST OFFICE, COONOOR 643 101 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3810 CRL.A No. 662 of 2023 C/W CRL.A No. 668 of 2023 THE NILGIRIS, TAMILNADU. 4. MR J JAMES AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O MR A JOSEPH JAGANATHAN, R/AT NO 100, STANELEY PARK ROAD, OTTUPATRAI, COONOOR 643 101 THE NILGIRIS, TAMILNADU STATE. 5. BENJAMIN PAUL DANIEL AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O LATE J DENIEL, R/AT NO 187, BROOKLANDS, COONOOR 643 101, THE NILGIRIS TAMIL NADU STATE. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MUJTABA H., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(4) OF CR.P.C. FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT PASSED IN C.C.NO. 833/2018, ON THE FILE OF 6TH ADDL.JUDGE OF SMALL CAUSE A.C.M.M JUDGE AT BANGALORE (SCCH- 2) DATED 19-01-2023, BY TRIAL COURT AND CONVICT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 5 BY IMPOSING THE FINE OF TWICE THE CHEQUE AMOUNT AND SENTENCE THEM FOR MAXIMUM PUNISHMENT AS PRESCRIBED FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER 138 OF NI ACT BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT PASSED AND AWARD MAXIMUM COMPENSATION TO THE APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA ORAL JUDGMENT 1. These appeals are filed by the appellant/complainant being aggrieved by the Judgment of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3810 CRL.A No. 662 of 2023 C/W CRL.A No. 668 of 2023 acquittal dated 19.01.2023 passed in C.C.No.832/2018 by the Small Cause Judge at Bangalore (SCCH-2) and C.C.No.833/2018 by the VI Addl. Judge of Small Cause A.C.M.M Judge at Bangalore (SCCH-2) (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 CrPC was inserted in the statue 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 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 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3810 CRL.A No. 662 of 2023 C/W CRL.A No. 668 of 2023 advert to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of Cr.PC." 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 against the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court before the Sessions Court, since he is considered to be a victim. If this Court were to proceed to hear and decide these appeals at this stage, it could deprive the parties of an available forum, i.e. this Court, for further challenge. 4. Similar view has been taken by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in CHARBEL INDIA V. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH reported in 2025 SCC ONLINE AP 2815; by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in MANORAMA KANKANE v. NARENDRA KUMAR SHUKLA rendered in Criminal Appeal No.5910 of 2025 decided on 03rd July, 2025; and in the case of LATE KISAN SEWA KENDRA v. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3810 CRL.A No. 662 of 2023 C/W CRL.A No. 668 of 2023 PRITAM SINGH reported in 2025 SCC ONLINE MP 4818; and in SMT. URMIT MADRAH v. SAMARPAN JAIN rendered Criminal Appeal No. 11872 of 2022 decided on 21st July, 2025; the decision of High Court of Chattisgarh in NEELAM SAHU v. NARADNAGWANSHI rendered in ACQA No. 340 of 2018 decided on 16th July, 2025; and in SMT. KIRTI KURIAN v. AJAY SINGH rendered in ACQA No. 198 of 2019 decided on 16th July, 2025; the judgment of this Court in the case of SIDAGONDAPPA v. SHAFI AHAMAD rendered in CRL.A. No. 20021/2018 decided on 31st July, 2025 and in SRI T.H. LENKAPPA v. SRI SANJAY AND ANOTHER rendered in Criminal Appeal No.146 of 2015 decided on 23rd July, 2025; the decision of High Court of Delhi in the case of D.K. ASSOCIATES v. SHANKAR AND ANOTHER rendered in Criminal Appeal No.694 of 2016 decided on 13th November, 2025 and the decision rendered by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M/S. ANANYA ENTERPRISES v. SRI G.S. GOPALAKRISHNA rendered in Criminal Appeal No.100171 of 2016 decided on 24th - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3810 CRL.A No. 662 of 2023 C/W CRL.A No. 668 of 2023 November, 2025. An overall assessment of the aforestated decisions reveals that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CELESTIUM FINANCIAL (supra) has been relied upon by this Court, as well as other High Courts across the country. 5. Considering the above, it is deemed fit that these appeals be transferred to the concerned appellate Court of Sessions and be considered as an appeal under the proviso to Section 413 of BNSS, 2023 (formerly Section 372 of Cr.PC) and numbered accordingly. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: O R D E R i. Registry is directed to transfer the entire record of the case, including the requisitioned copies of the trial court Records, 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; - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3810 CRL.A No. 662 of 2023 C/W CRL.A No. 668 of 2023 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 matters as expeditiously as possible; 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. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3810 CRL.A No. 662 of 2023 C/W CRL.A No. 668 of 2023 6. In the light of the above observation and directions, appeals stand disposed of. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE TIN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4