[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Godrej Agrovet Limited vs Madahava Poultry Farm on 12 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:8614
CRL.A No. 1431 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. 1431 OF 2024 (A)
BETWEEN:
1. GODREJ AGROVET LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER PROVISIONS
OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
GODREJ ONE, 3RD FLOOR,
PIROJSHANAGAR,
EASTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY,
VIKHROLL (EAST)
MUMBAI-400079
AND ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
NO.497, HMT LAYOUT, 5TH CROSS,
7TH MAIN, V.V. NAGAR,
R.T. NAGAR POST,
BANGALORE-560032.
...APPELLANT
Digitally signed (BY SRI. AJITH A. SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
by
MAHALAKSHMI AND:
BM
Location: HIGH 1. MADAHAVA POULTRY FARM
COURT OF A PARTNERSHIP FIRM
KARNATAKA HAVING IT OFFICE
OPPOSITE TO KIRLOSKAR FACTORY,
CHIKKANSANKANDI, NEAR TOLL GATE,
KOPPAL TALUK, KOPPAL DISTRICT,
BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,
MR. KONERU MADHUBABU.
2. SRI KONERU MADHUBABU
MANAGING PARTNER OF MADHAVA POULTRY FARM
2ND FLOOR, SRINIVAS APARTMENT,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:8614
CRL.A No. 1431 of 2024
HC-KAR
VIVEKANAND NAGAR,
HOSPET-583201.
3. SMT. SHAILAJA
PARTNER OF MADHAVA POULTRY FARM
2ND FLOOR, SRINIVAS APARTMENT,
VIVEKANAND NAGAR,
HOSPET-583201.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.PC PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 22.05.2023 PASSED IN
C.C.NO.53460/2018 BY THE HON'BLE XIV A.C.M.M., MAYO
HALL UNIT, BENGALURU IN PROCEEDING BEARING NUMBER
C.C.NO.53460/2018 AS PER DOCUMENT NO.1 THEREBY
RESTORING THE MATTER TO ITS FILE AND REOPENING THE
SAME FOR ISSUANCE OF PROCLAMATION TO THE CONCERNED
ACCUSED.
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 dismissal of complaint
vide order 22.05.2023 passed in C.C No.53460/2018 by
the XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayo Hall
Unit, Bengaluru (for short "the trial Court").
NC: 2026:KHC:8614
HC-KAR
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 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."
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 before the Sessions Court. If this Court
NC: 2026:KHC:8614
HC-KAR
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. 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
NC: 2026:KHC:8614
HC-KAR
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
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.
5. In the light of the above observation and
directions, appeal stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
MBM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28
