Karnataka High Court
Sri R Pramod Kumar vs Sri P Bhaskar Naidu on 20 February, 2024
-1-
CRL.A No. 541 of 2018
NC: 2024:KHC:7021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.541 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
SRI R PRAMOD KUMAR
S/O A RAMACHANDRA,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.467,
"KANCHANA KRUPA"
39TH C CROSS, 9TH MAIN ROAD,
V BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 011
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. V VISWANATHA SETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI P BHASKAR NAIDU
S/O P MUNNAIAH NAIDU,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.113, 11TH MAIN ROAD,
Digitally 4TH B BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
signed by
REKHA R BENGALURU - 560 011
Location: High
Court of 2. SRI M SRINIVASULU
Karnataka
S/O M RACHAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.33, 36TH MAIN ROAD,
1ST STAGE, BTM LAYOUT,
BENGALURU - 560 068
3. SRI M PANDURANGAIAH
S/O LATE M NARAYAN,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT NO.237, 2ND FLOOR,
26TH CROSS, K.R.ROAD,
-2-
CRL.A No. 541 of 2018
NC: 2024:KHC:7021
BANASHANKARI II STAGE,
BENGALURU - 560 070
(DELETED VIDE ORDER DATED 31.07.2019
AMENDED CARRIED OUT)
4. SRI K RUDRAIAH
S/O K VENKATA RAJU,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.34, 9TH CROSS,
K.R.LAYOUT, 6TH PHASE,
J.P.NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 078.
5. STATE BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
KENGERI POLICE STATION,
REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 01
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. J T RAJAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2;
SRI. P.MAHADEVA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF CR.P.C
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE
LEARNED LVI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU DATED 07.02.2018 IN
C.C.NO.1413/2010 AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO CONVICT
THE RESPONDENTS FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 420 AND 120(B) OF IPC BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE
PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal filed by the complainant (aggrieved
person/victim) under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C, challenging
the acquittal of respondents/accused for the offences
punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. In C.C.No.1413/2010
NC: 2024:KHC:7021
on the file of LVI ACMM, Bengaluru. Under Section 378(4)
Cr.P.C, a complainant can file appeal against acquittal of
accused in any case instituted upon complaint. Since the
present case is initiated on the basis of charge sheet filed
by the concerned police, the complainant (aggrieved
person/victim) is given right of appeal under proviso to
Section 372 Cr.P.C. which reads as follows:
"372. No appeal to lie unless otherwise provided - No
appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a
Criminal Court except as provided for by this Code or
by any other law for the time being in force:
Provided that the victim shall have a right to
prefer an appeal against any order passed by the
Court acquitting the accused or convicting for a
lesser offence or imposing inadequate compensation,
and such appeal shall lie to the Court to which an
appeal ordinarily lies against the order of conviction
of such Court."
2. Having regard to the fact that the offence
alleged is punishable under Section 420 I.P.C and the
order is passed by the Magistrate, as per proviso to
Section 372 Cr.P.C, complainant (aggrieved person/victim)
is required to file the appeal before the Sessions Court. In
NC: 2024:KHC:7021
view of the same, the present appeal is dismissed as not
maintainable.
3. However, liberty is reserved to the complainant
(aggrieved person/victim) to file the appeal before the
Sessions Court within a period of one month from today,
in which event the time spent before this Court shall be
deducted out of the period of limitation. Having regard to
the fact this matter is of the year 2018, the Sessions Court
shall try to dispose of the matter at the earliest, preferably
within a period of six months from the date of appearance
of respondents/accused and accordingly, the following:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is dismissed as not maintainable
before this Court.
(ii) However, the complainant (aggrieved
person/victim) is at liberty to file the appeal
before the Sessions Court, within a period
of one month from today, in which event
the time spent before this Court shall be
deducted out of the period of limitation.
NC: 2024:KHC:7021
(iii) Having regard to the fact that, this matter is
of the year 2018, the Sessions Court shall
try to dispose of the matter at the earliest,
preferably within a period of six months
from the date of appearance of
respondents/accused.
(iv) The Registry is directed to send back the
trial Court Records along with copy of this
judgment forthwith.
(v) As per order dated 04.02.2024, respondent
No.3/accused No.3 has furnished cash
security of Rs.25,000/-. He is at liberty to
withdraw the same.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RR
