[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
M/S Suguna Foods Pvt Ltd vs Azhar Ahamed on 12 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:8675
CRL.A No. 1023 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1023 OF 2024 (A)
BETWEEN:
M/S SUGUNA FOODS PVT LTD
RAMKY HOUSE, 3RD FLOOR,
SITE NO.25-30
RAGHAVENDRA NAGAR,
KALAYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560 043
REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORISED OFFICER/DEPUTY MANAGER ACCOUNTS SRI
ARUN P
S/O PALANI R
AGED 34 YEARS
R/O NO.193, SRI. SAI NILAYA,
10TH CROSS, 6TH BLOCK
ANNAPURNESHWARI TEMPLE NEAR
ANNAPURNESHWARI NAGAR
NAGARABHAVI
BENGALURU- 560 072.
Digitally signed by ...APPELLANT
MAHALAKSHMI B
M (BY SRI. MADHUKAR NADIG.,ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH AND:
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AZHAR AHAMED
S/O ANWAR AHAMED SHARIFF
PROPRIETOR OF K G N POULTRY SERVICE
SHOP AT NO.72
OPPOSITE VARTINARY HOSPITAL GATE
MYSORE ROAD,
CHAMARAJ PET
BENGALURU-560 018.
ALSO RESIDING AT
R/O 166/1, 1ST CROSS,
TELECOM LAYOUT
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:8675
CRL.A No. 1023 of 2024
HC-KAR
VIJAYANAGAR, MAGADI ROAD
BENGALURU- 560 023.
...RESPONDENT
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL DATED 07.02.2024 PASSED BY THE XIV
ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND ACMM AT BENGALURU
(CCH-10) IN C.C.NO.4492/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE
PRIVATE COMPLIANT FILED BY THE APPELLANT U/S.138 OF THE NI
ACT BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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 of acquittal dated 07.02.2024
passed in CC No.4492/2023 by XIV Additional Small Causes
Judge, ACMM and Member, MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-10) (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
NC: 2026:KHC:8675
HC-KAR
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."
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
NC: 2026:KHC:8675
HC-KAR
No.5910 of 2025 decided on 03rd July, 2025; and in the case of
M/S. LATA KISAN SEWA KENDRA v. PRITAM SINGH reported in
2025 SCC ONLINE MP 4818; and in SMT. URMIT MADRAH 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
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. SHAFI AHAMAD 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
NC: 2026:KHC:8675
HC-KAR
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
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;
NC: 2026:KHC:8675
HC-KAR
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 fact that 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 observation 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
MBM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48
