Smt Latha Murthy Vs Smt Radha — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2025)

Smt Latha Murthy Vs Smt Radha — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of by directing transfer of the entire record to the concerned Principal District & Sessions Judge for assignment to the jurisdictional appellate Sessions Court, where it is to be considered and numbered as an appeal under the proviso to Section 413 BNSS, 2023; transferee court to issue notice to both parties, take over pending applications (including condonation of delay), endeavour expeditious disposal, and permit amendment of the cause-title; merits expressly left open.

Issue for consideration

Whether the complainant's appeal against acquittal, filed under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C., should be entertained by the High Court or transferred to the Sessions Court to be treated as an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC / proviso to Section 413 BNSS, 2023, the complainant being a victim.

Court's answer

In light of the Supreme Court's clarification in Celestium Financial, the appellant, being the complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, is entitled to file an appeal against the judgment of acquittal before the Sessions Court, since she is considered to be a victim.

Ratio / Principle

The present appeal is transferred to the concerned Principal District & Sessions Judge, to be assigned to the appellate Sessions Court having jurisdiction, considered and numbered as an appeal under the proviso to Section 413 of BNSS, 2023 (formerly Section 372 of Cr.PC), with the record (including requisitioned trial-court copies) transferred, notice to the parties, transfer of pending condonation/other applications, a request for expeditious disposal, and liberty to the appellant to amend the cause-title.

Key takeaways

The Court expressly made no observations on the merits of the case; all rights and contentions of the parties are left open to be agitated before the transferee Court.obiter¶51

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Victim-complainant's appeal against acquittal under S.138 N.I. Act — forum. The complainant had filed CRL.A. under S.378(4) Cr.P.C. against her acquittal judgment dated 08.08.2017 in C.C.No.12764/2016 (XXII Addl. C.M.M., Bangalore). Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in CELESTIUM FINANCIAL v. A GNANASEKARAN, 2025 SCC ONLINE SC 1320 (para 10) — that a victim may appeal under the proviso to S.372 CrPC irrespective of being a complainant, without resorting to S.378(4) — and noting consistent views of other High Courts, the Karnataka High Court held the complainant to be a 'victim' entitled to appeal against acquittal before the Sessions Court, and disposed of the appeal by transferring the record to the Principal District & Sessions Judge for assignment to the appellate Sessions Court and renumbering as an appeal under the proviso to S.413 BNSS, 2023 (formerly proviso to S.372 CrPC), with directions for notice, transfer of pending applications, expeditious disposal and amendment of cause-title; no observations on merits.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:50356 CRL.A No. 1698 of 2017

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1698 OF 2017 (A)

BETWEEN:

SMT LATHA MURTHY W/O. SRI. V. SREENIVASAMURTHY, R/AT 151/02, 2^ND CROSS, BYRASANDRA MAIN ROAD, JAYANAGAR 1^ST BLOCK EAST, BANGALORE - 560011

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. THEJESH P., ADV.)

AND:

SMT RADHA W/O. NANJUNDASWAMY, R/AT 23, 138/C, 1^ST CROSS, 1^ST MAIN, 1^ST STAGE, ITTIMADU, BANGALORE-560085.

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. M. SHIVAPRAKASH, ADV.)

…RESPONDENT

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.08.2017 PASSED BY THE XXII ADDL.C.M.M., BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.12764/2016 AT DOCUEMNT NO.1-ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I ACT.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:50356 CRL.A No. 1698 of 2017

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant

being aggrieved by the Order dated 08^th August, 2017 passed in CC No.12764 of 2016 by the XXII Additional CJJ, Bangalore (for short "the trial Court").

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. 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. "

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

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:50356 CRL.A No. 1698 of 2017

HC-KAR

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.

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 03^rd July, 2025; and in the case of LATE KISAN SEWA KENDRA v. PRITAM SINGH reported in 2025

SCC ONLINE MP 4818; and in SMT. URMITMADRAH v. SAMARPAN JAIN rendered Criminal Appeal No. 11872 of 2022 decided on 21^st July, 2025; the decision of High Court of Chattisgarh in NEELAM SAHU v. NARADNAGWANSHI rendered in ACQA No. 340 of 2018 decided on 16^th July, 2025; and in SMT. KIRTI KURIAN v. AJAY SINGH rendered in ACQA No. 198 of 2019 decided on 16^th July, 2025; the judgment of this Court

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:50356 CRL.A No. 1698 of 2017

HC-KAR

in the case of SIDAGONDAPPA v. SHAFIAHAMAD rendered in

CRL.A. No. 20021/2018 decided on 31^st July, 2025 and in SRI T.H. LENKAPPA v. SRI SANJAY AND ANOTHER rendered in Criminal Appeal No.146 of 2015 decided on 23^rd 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 13^th 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 24^th 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.

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)

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:50356 CRL.A No. 1698 of 2017

HC-KAR

and numbered accordingly. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

O R D E R

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 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;

6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:50356 CRL.A No. 1698 of 2017

HC-KAR

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.

In the light of the above observation and directions,

appeal stands disposed of.

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

lnn List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53