Basavaraj S/O Siddappa Byadagi Vs Smt. Rekha W/O Parashuram Bettar

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:16435 CRL.A No. 100026 of 2023

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100026 OF 2023 (A-)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

BASAVARAJ S/O SIDDAPPA BYADAGI, AGED ABOUT: 55 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, RESIDING AT AVARAGUPPA QUATRES KERI AVARAGUPPA, SIDDAPUR DIST. UTTARA KANNADA- 581329

¶9

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. UMESH P. HAKKARAKI, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SMT. REKHA W/O PARASHURAM BETTAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS RESIDING AT BEHIND SHANKAR MATH SIDDAPUR DIST. UTTAR KANNADA- 581329.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 378 (4) OF CR.P.C., IS SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 26.09.2022 PASSED BY THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIDDAPUR IN CC NO. 713/2019, WHEREIN THE RESPONDENTACCUSED HAS BEEN ACQUITTED FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABEL INSTRUMENT ACT.

¶16

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC-D:16435 CRL.A No. 100026 of 2023

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH)

¶22

This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant

¶23

being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court.

¶24

However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc.¹ , held in paragraph No.10 as under:

¶25

“10. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of the CrPC was inserted in the statute 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 the 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

¶26

1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:16435 CRL.A No. 100026 of 2023

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of the Cr.PC.”

¶30

On careful reading of the judgment of the Apex Court supra, it is evident that, the complainant being victim has to file an appeal against the order of acquittal before the Jurisdictional Sessions Court by invoking Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶31

In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court, in Celestial supra, the appeal by the complainant against the order of acquittal is not maintainable before this Court. Since this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the appeal on merit, the appeal is transferred to jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court.

¶32

The parties shall appear before the jurisdictional Appellate Court / Sessions Court on 13.01.2026 , without further notice of the concerned Court.

¶33