SRI. K. DODDABASAPPA @ K. DODDABASAPPA v. A. Gnanasekaran Etc.1

SRI. K. DODDABASAPPA @ K. DODDABASAPPA S/O LATE HANUMANA GOUDA, AGED ABOUT: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: MADURE VILLAGE, KOLURU POST, TQ AND DIST: BALLARI. (BY SRI. S.M. KALWAD, ADVOCATE) AND: …APPELLANT SRI. K. GADILINGAPPA S/O GULYA POMPANNA, HINDU, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NADAVI POST, SIRUGUPPA, TQ AND DIST: BALLARI. (BY SRI. SHIVARAJ C. BELLAKKI, ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 378(4) OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 18.07.2019 MADE IN C.C.NO.2085/2016 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C, BALLARI AND THE RESPONDENT BE TO CONVICT FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 138 OF NI ACT AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT O PAY THE CHEQUE AMOUNT WITH INTEREST THEREON AND ALSO WITH THE PENALTY, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:16164 CRL.A No. 100349 of 2019 HC-KAR ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH)

This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court.

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:16164 CRL.A No. 100349 of 2019 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 13.01.2026, 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:16164 CRL.A No. 100349 of 2019 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 VMB List No.: 4 Sl No.: 42