Yogesh Gourav T Vs Ganganna — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2026)

Yogesh Gourav T Vs Ganganna — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal found not maintainable before the High Court and transferred to the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court; parties directed to appear there on 30.06.2026 without further notice; Registry to transmit the entire appeal papers including appeal memo; appellant's counsel has liberty to amend the cause title and provisions thereof; appeal recorded as disposed of for statistical purposes.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appeal filed by the complainant (who is the victim) under S.378(4) CrPC against the order of acquittal is maintainable before the High Court, or whether, per the proviso to S.372 CrPC, such an appeal must be filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court.

Court's answer

On a careful reading of the Apex Court's judgment in Celestium Financial, it is evident that the complainant, being the 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.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Celestium Financial, 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 merits, the appeal is transferred to the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Maintainability of complainant's appeal against acquittal — CRL.A No. 101 of 2021 (High Court of Karnataka, S Rachaiah J., 04.06.2026). The appellant-complainant, invoking S.378(4) Cr.P.C, challenged the acquittal of the respondent-accused in C.C.No.1708/2016 (V Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Hassan, judgment dated 29.11.2019) for an offence punishable under SECTION.138 OF N.I. ACT. Relying on Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 SCC Online SC 1320 (paragraph 10: the victim of an offence may appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC irrespective of whether he is the complainant, and even if he is the complainant need not advert to subsection (4) of Section 378), the court concluded that the complainant, being the victim, must file the appeal against acquittal before the jurisdictional Sessions Court by invoking Section 372 CrPC 1973. Holding the appeal not maintainable before it and stating it had no jurisdiction to decide the appeal on merit, the court transferred the appeal to the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court, directed the parties to appear there on 30.06.2026, ordered the Registry to transmit the entire appeal papers including the appeal memo, gave counsel liberty to amend the cause title and provisions, and recorded the appeal as disposed of for statistical purposes.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:26283 CRL.A No. 101 of 2021

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 101 OF 2021 (A)

BETWEEN:

Digitally signed by SUSHMA LAKSHMI B S Location: High Court of Karnataka

YOGESH GOURAV T S/O THIMAIAH H, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O EWS NO. 529, 14^TH CROSS, KUVEMPUNAGAR, HASSAN - 573 201

(BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE., ADVOCATE)

…APPELLANT

AND:

GANGANNA S/O LAKSHMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:26283 CRL.A No. 101 of 2021

HC-KAR

RESIDENT OF ANUGAVALLI VILLAGE, DUDDA HOBALI, HASSAN TQ AND DIS, WORKING AS CLERK, MECHANICAL DEPARTMENT, MALNAD COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, HASSAN - 573 201.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. K RAVISHANKAR., ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.A. FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C BY THE

ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE I JUDGMENT DATED 29.11.2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED V ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT HASSAN IN C.C.NO.1708/2016, ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT / ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION.138 OF N.I. ACT.

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

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:26283 CRL.A No. 101 of 2021

HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

ORAL JUDGMENT

appellant/complainant being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court.

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

“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,

1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:26283 CRL.A No. 101 of 2021

HC-KAR

he can still proceed under the proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to subsection (4) of Section 378 of the Cr.PC.”

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.

In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble 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.

The parties shall appear before the jurisdictional Appellate Court / Sessions Court on 30.06.2026 , without further notice of the concerned Court.

The Registry shall transmit entire appeal papers including appeal memo to the jurisdictional Sessions Court.

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:26283 CRL.A No. 101 of 2021

HC-KAR

The learned counsel for the appellant shall have

the liberty to carry out the amendment in the cause title and also the provisions thereof.

For statistical purpose, this appeal stands

disposed off.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

NM

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1