SRI. JAYAPRAKASH v. A. Gnanasekaran Etc.1
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 372, 378, 378(4)
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 419(4)
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 s. 138
Judgment
SRI. JAYAPRAKASH S/O BASAVA SHETTY, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O: GOPALPUR, MALMADDI, DHARWAD- 580001. (BY SRI. R.H. ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: …APPELLANT
PRAKASH B. PATIL, AGE: 58 YEARS, R/O: H.NO.66, PATIL LAYOUT VIDYA NAGAR, HUBBALLI, TQ. HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD- 580021.
VIJAY PILLE NAGASHANTI HONDA, VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI- 580021. …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC. 378(4) OF CR.P.C. (U/SEC. 419(4) OF BNSS ACT SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 12.02.2025 IN C.C.NO. 1132/2023 BY THE COURT OF THE III JMFC DHARWAD AND ADDITIONAL CIVIL CONSEQUENTLY AN ORDER OF CONVICTION BE PASSED AGAINST THE ACCUSED/RESPONDENT HEREIN FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 138 OF NI ACT AND ETC. JUDGE AND THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:17812 CRL.A No. 100142 of 2025 HC-KAR 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 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 only with effect
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 proviso to Section 372 and need not advert 1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:17812 CRL.A No. 100142 of 2025 HC-KAR to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of the Cr.PC.”
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.
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.
The parties shall appear before the jurisdictional Appellate Court / Sessions Court on 27.01.2026, without further notice of the concerned Court.
The Registry shall transmit entire appeal papers including appeal memo to the jurisdictional Sessions Court. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:17812 CRL.A No. 100142 of 2025 HC-KAR
The learned counsel for the appellant shall have the liberty to carry out the amendment in the cause title and also the provisions thereof.
For statistical purpose, this appeal stands disposed off.
Ordered accordingly. SD/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE SMM List No.: 3 Sl No.: 24
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.