Sadashiva K R Vs Prasanna

Digitally signed by PRASANNA SUSHMA LAKSHMI S/O LATE RPABHAKAR B S AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, Location: High Court R/A DOOR NO.1607, of Karnataka 4^TH CROSS, HOSAKERI, K R MOHALLA, MYSURU.

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(RESPONDENT IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶14

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:28023 CRL.A No. 118 of 2020

¶15

HC-KAR

¶16

THIS CRL.A FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 03.06.2019 PASSED BY THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT KUNIGAL IN C.C.NO.1394/2016, ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF THE N.I ACT.

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶19

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶20

This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court.

¶21

However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in

¶22

Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc.¹ , held in paragraph No.10 as under:

¶23

“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

¶24

1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320

¶25

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:28023 CRL.A No. 118 of 2020

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

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 to subsection (4) of Section 378 of the Cr.PC.”

¶28

On careful reading of the judgment of the Hon’ble

¶29

Apex Court supra, 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.

¶30

In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, in Celestium Financial case 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 the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court.

¶31

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:28023 CRL.A No. 118 of 2020

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

The parties shall appear before the jurisdictional Appellate Court / Sessions Court on 02.07.2026 , without further notice of the concerned Court.

¶34

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

¶35

The learned counsel for the appellant shall have the liberty to carry out the amendment in the cause title and also the provisions thereof.

¶36

For statistical purposes, this appeal stands disposed of . Ordered accordingly.

¶37

In view of the disposal of the appeal, pending I.A., if any, does not survive for consideration and the same is also disposed of.

¶38

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶39

NM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8

Sadashiva K R v. Prasanna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadashiva K R v. Prasanna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Chethan T Vs Sri Chinnamada Naidu

Sri Ajmal Ahammed Vs the State by

M/S. Green Pickles Pvt. Ltd, Vs Sri. Gangappa

Sri.Phani Kumar P N Vs Sri.Abhijith Raju.K

Sri Sureshkumar H Vs Smt. M S Sumathi

Sri S v Prasad Vs Bharathiya Karmika Kshemabhivridhi Prathishtana