M/S Rishab Electrical Industrial ... vs Royal Constructions
2026 Latest Caselaw 112 Kant

Karnataka High Court

M/S Rishab Electrical Industrial ... vs Royal Constructions on 8 January, 2026

                                                     -1-
                                                                  NC: 2026:KHC:1091
                                                             CRL.A No. 1600 of 2025


                          HC-KAR



                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                                   DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
                                                   BEFORE
                                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
                                    CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1600 OF 2025 (A)
                          BETWEEN:
                          M/S RISHAB ELECTRICAL INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIER,
                          NO.14, SOURASTRAPET,
                          NEAR CHICKPET POLICE STATION,
                          BENGALURU,
                          REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR,
                          SRI. RAJENDRA JAIN.
                                                                       ...APPELLANT
                          (BY SRIYUTHS. MOHAN KUMAR G. AND
                           SHREYAS B.S., ,ADVOCATES)
                          AND:
                          ROYAL CONSTRUCTIONS
                          NO. 353, 2ND FLOOR, 1ST CROSS,
                          GOKULA, 1ST STAGE, 2ND PHASE,
                          MATHIKERE, BENGALURU- 560054.

                          ALSO AT:
                          ROYAL CONSTRUCTIONS
Digitally signed by
                          SITE DELIVERY ADDRESS,
LAKSHMINARAYAN N
Location: High Court of
                          NO.05, PATEL CHAUVAPPA STREET,
Karnataka                 T.V TOWER, BACK SIDE,
                          J.C NAGAR, BENGALURU-560006.

                          ROYAL CONSTRUCTIONS
                          NO. 71, 10TH CROSS, PAPANNA BADAVANE,
                          5TH BLOCK, CBI MAIN ROAD,
                          GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU-560032.

                          REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR
                          MR. AFTAB ALAM.
                                                                     ...RESPONDENT
                          (BY SRI. SRIRAM M.,ADVOCATE)
                                 -2-
                                                 NC: 2026:KHC:1091
                                          CRL.A No. 1600 of 2025


HC-KAR



     THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.PC (FILED U/S
419(4) BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED
28.06.2025 PASSED IN C.C.NO.11790/2021 ON THE FILE OF
THE HONBLE XXIV ADDL.SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND A.C.J.M
AT BENGALURU.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, 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 28.06.2025

passed in CC No.11790 of 2021 by the XXIV Addl. Small Causes

Judge and ACJM, 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.

NC: 2026:KHC:1091

HC-KAR

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

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

NC: 2026:KHC:1091

HC-KAR

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

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.

NC: 2026:KHC:1091

HC-KAR

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;

iii. In case there are applications pending for condonation of delay or any other pending applications, the same also be transferred to

NC: 2026:KHC:1091

HC-KAR

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.

6. In the light of the above observation and directions,

appeal stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

LNN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53