Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 11123 Kant
Judgement Date : 2 December, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:50351
CRL.A No. 359 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 359 OF 2025 (A)
BETWEEN:
SMT VASANTHA S.
W/O SAMPATH,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.1,
HAGADURU COLONY,
NEAR SAPTHAPADI KALYANA MANTAPA,
IMMADIHALLI MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 066.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR U., ADV.)
AND:
M/S OM SAI RAM CHIT FUNDS
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR,
SMT. MALA, W/O ARUN,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
RESIDING AT WARD NO. 84,
BEHIND BAJANE MANE,
Digitally signed by HAGADUR BENGALURU NORTH,
LAKSHMINARAYAN N
Location: HIGH COURT BENGALURU - 560 066.
OF KARNATAKA
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. GIRIDHAR H., ADV.)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE
JUDGEMENT DTD 17.12.2024 PASSED IN CC.NO.4095/2023 BY
THE LEARNED ACJM, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT,
BENGALURU AND THEREBY PASS AN ORDER FOR CONVICTION
DIRECTING THE ACCUSED TO PAY DOUBLE THE CHEQUE
AMOUNT IN RESPECT OF CHEQUE BEARING NO.153822 FOR
RS.6,40,000/- DTD 28.12.2022 DRAWN ON STATE BANK OF
INDIA, WHITEFIELD BRANCH, BENGALURU, IN FAVOUR OF THE
COMPLAINANT.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:50351
CRL.A No. 359 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant
being aggrieved by the Judgment dated 17th December, 2024
passed in CC No.4095 of 2023 by the ACJM, Bengaluru Rural
District, Bengaluru (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 advert to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of Cr.PC."
NC: 2025:KHC:50351
HC-KAR
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 the
appeal 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. PRITAM SINGH reported in 2025
SCC ONLINE MP 4818; and in SMT. URMITMADRAH 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
NC: 2025:KHC:50351
HC-KAR
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. SHAFIAHAMAD 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 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 the
present appeal be transferred to the concerned appellate Court
NC: 2025:KHC:50351
HC-KAR
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:
ORDER
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;
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;
NC: 2025:KHC:50351
HC-KAR
iv. Considering the matter has been pending for considerable time, the Appellate Court is requested to make an endeavour to dispose of the matter 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.
6. In the light of the above observation and directions,
appeal stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE
lnn List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!