Disposed

Sathyanarayana B H v. Devaraju

Karnataka HC21 Jan 2026CRL.A/143/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka upheld the right of a complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act to file an appeal under the proviso to Section 413 of BNSS (formerly Section 372 Cr.P.C.) as a victim. The court transferred the appeal to the Sessions Appellate Court, permitting amendments to the cause title, without adjudicating merits.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of by transferring the entire case record to the Sessions Appellate Court for adjudication under Section 413 of BNSS.

Sathyanarayana B H Vs Devaraju — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:3513 CRL.A No. 143 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 143 OF 2025 (A)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SATHYANARAYANA B. H., S/O LATE HONNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

¶10

R/AT M M ROAD, BANNUR TOWN ,

¶11

T NARSIPURA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT - 571 101.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. GOVARDHAN. S., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

DEVARAJU

¶16

S/O LATE KALAIAH,

¶17

AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

¶18

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶19

R/AT NEAR THE HOUSE OF EX MLA S KRISHNAPPA, MARKET ROAD, KELAGALA KERI BANNUR TOWN, T NARASIPURA TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT – 571 101.

¶20

…RESPONDENT

¶21

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.11.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC T.NARASIPURA, IN C.C.NO.389/2023 AND MAY BE PLEASED TO CONVICT THE RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/ 138 OF NI ACT.

¶22

¶23

NC: 2026:KHC:3513 CRL.A No. 143 of 2025

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶28

This appeal is filed by the

¶29

appellant/complainant being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal dated 02.11.2023 passed in C.C.No.389/2023 by the Civil Judge and JMFC, T.Narasipura (for short "the trial

¶30

Court")

¶31

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:

¶32

" 10. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. 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

¶33

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:3513 CRL.A No. 143 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of Cr. P.C., 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. P.C. "

¶36

In the light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's

¶37

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.

¶38

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

¶39

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:3513 CRL.A No. 143 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

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. URMIT MADRAH v. SAMARPAN JAIN rendered

¶42

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 in the case of SIDAGONDAPPA v. SHAFI AHAMAD 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-

¶43

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:3513 CRL.A No. 143 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

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

¶46

Court in the case of CELESTIUM FINANCIAL (supra) has been relied upon by this Court, as well as other High Courts across the country.

¶47

Considering the above, it is deemed fit that the

¶48

present appeal be transferred to the concerned appellate Court of Sessions and be considered as an appeal under

¶49

the proviso to Section 413 of BNSS, 2023 (formerly Section 372 of Cr.P.C) and numbered accordingly. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶50

O R D E R

¶51

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

¶52

¶53

NC: 2026:KHC:3513 CRL.A No. 143 of 2025

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

concerned Appellate Court having the jurisdiction and for which purpose, it would be listed before the Principal District & Sessions Judge;

¶56

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;

¶57

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;

¶58

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;

¶59

v. The appellant is permitted to carry out necessary amendment in the cause-title and also the provisions thereof;

¶60

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:3513 CRL.A No. 143 of 2025

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

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.

¶63

In the light of the above observation and

¶64

directions, appeal stands disposed of.

¶65

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶66

TIN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19

Sathyanarayana B H v. Devaraju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sathyanarayana B H v. Devaraju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nanjunda K J Vs State of by Dcre Police Station

M/S Sacred Heart Souharda Credit Co-Operative Limited Vs Sri Chikkasiddaiah

Pramodh N Vs State by Soladevanahalli Police Station

Nayaz Vs State by Gubbi Police Station

Sri.C. Ramachandra Vs Sri. P. Subbaiah

Mrs. Naseema Hameed Vs Mr. John Nesa Kumar