[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Madegowda N R vs Sri Manjunath M N on 11 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:8474
CRL.A No. 928 of 2015
C/W CRL.A No. 929 of 2015
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 928 OF 2015 (A-)
C/W
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 929 OF 2015
IN CRL.A No. 928/2015
BETWEEN:
1. SRI MADEGOWDA N R
S/O LATE RAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT NO.299,3RD "A CROSS,
50 FEET ROAD,T.C. NAGAR,
Digitally signed LAGGERE,
by
SHARADAVANI BANGALORE-560 058
B
...APPELLANT
Location: High
Court of (BY SRI. UMASHANKAR M N., ADVOCATE)
Karnataka
AND:
1. SRI MANJUNATH M N
FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN
TO THE APPELLANT
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/AT NO.158,50 FEET ROAD,
BHAMADEVARA MATA ROAD,
CHOWDESHWARI NAGAR,
LAGGERE, BANGALORE-560 058
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. N NAGARAJA ., ADVOCATE)
CRL.A. FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE
APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED
TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT ORDER DATED 10.04.2014 PASSED
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:8474
CRL.A No. 928 of 2015
C/W CRL.A No. 929 of 2015
HC-KAR
BY THE XIX A.C.M.M., BANGALORE, IN C.C.NO.19104/2012 (PCR
NO.6181/2012) - ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I. ACT.
IN CRL.A NO. 929/2015
BETWEEN:
1. SRI MADEGOWDA N R
S/O LATE RAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT NO.299, 3RD A CROSS
50 FEET ROAD, T C NAGAR
LAGGERE, BANGALORE-560058
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. UMA SHANKAR M N.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI MANJUNATH M N
FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN
TO THE APPELLANT
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/AT NO. 158, 50 FEET ROAD
BHAMADEVARA MATA ROAD
CHOWDESHWARI NAGAR
LAGGERE BANGALORE-560058
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
CRL.A. FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR
THE APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE
PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ORDER
DATED 10.04.2014 PASSED BY THE XIX A.C.M.M., BANGALORE
IN C.C.NO.19105/2012 (P.C.R.NO.3950/2012) - ACQUITTING
THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF
N.I. ACT.
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:8474
CRL.A No. 928 of 2015
C/W CRL.A No. 929 of 2015
HC-KAR
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Crl.A.No.928/2015 is filed by the appellant/
complainant being aggrieved by the dismissal of complaint
vide order 10.04.2014 passed in C.C No.19104/2012 (PCR
No.6181/2012) by the XIX Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bangalore (for short "the trial Court").
2. Crl.A.No.929/2015 is filed by the appellant/
complainant being aggrieved by the dismissal of complaint
vide order 10.04.2014 passed in C.C No.19105/2012 (PCR
No.3950/2012) by the XIX Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bangalore (for short "the trial Court").
3. 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:
NC: 2026:KHC:8474
HC-KAR
"10. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372
of Cr.P.C. 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 Cr.
P.C., 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. P.C."
4. 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 before the Sessions Court. 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.
NC: 2026:KHC:8474
HC-KAR
5. Considering the above, it is deemed fit that the
present appeal be transferred to the concerned appellate
Court of Sessions. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i. Registry is directed to transfer the entire
record of the case 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;
iv. Considering the matter has been pending
for considerable time, the Appellate Court
NC: 2026:KHC:8474
HC-KAR
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, appeals stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
RJ
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 27
