Disposed¶47

Sri. H. Munivenkatappa v. Sri. M. Narayanaswamy

Karnataka HC13 Jul 2026CRL.A/1686/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of complainant's appeal against acquittal; Section 378(4) CrPC versus proviso to Section 372 CrPC; Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc., 2025 SCC Online SC 1320, relied upon; acquittal under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act; transfer of appeal from High Court to jurisdictional Sessions Court; C.C.No.50941/2014, XIV A.C.M.M. Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore; Karnataka High Court CRL.A No. 1686 of 2016; Justice S Rachaiah; appearance date 17.08.2026.

What did the court decide?

Appeal transferred to the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court; parties directed to appear there on 17.08.2026 without further notice; Registry to transmit the entire appeal papers including the appeal memo; liberty to the appellant's counsel to amend the cause title; pending I.A., if any, disposed of. ¶47

Sri. H. Munivenkatappa Vs Sri. M. Narayanaswamy — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶47

Issue for consideration

Whether the appeal filed by the complainant under Section 378(4) of the CrPC against the judgment of acquittal is maintainable before the High Court, in view of the ruling in Celestium Financial that a complainant who is the victim must prefer the appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC before the jurisdictional Sessions Court.

¶31

Court's answer

On a careful reading of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court 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.

¶38

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 merit, the appeal is transferred to the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court.

¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Appeal under S.378(4) CrPC by complainant against acquittal for offence under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act — Relying on Celestium Financial Vs. A. Gnanasekaran Etc. (2025 SCC Online SC 1320), held that the complainant, being the victim, has to file the appeal against the order of acquittal before the Jurisdictional Sessions Court by invoking Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; the appeal by the complainant against acquittal is not maintainable before the High Court under Section 378(4) — Since the High Court has no jurisdiction to decide the appeal on merit, the appeal is transferred to the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court; parties to appear on 17.08.2026 without further notice; Registry to transmit the entire appeal papers including the appeal memo; liberty to amend the cause title; appeal disposed of for statistical purposes and pending I.A. disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:35379 CRL.A No. 1686 of 2016

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶8

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1686 OF 2016 (A)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

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

¶11

SRI. H. MUNIVENKATAPPA, S/O. HANUMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.17, CHODESHWARI NILAYA, 3^RD CROSS, CHOWDESHWARI LAYOUT, C. V. RAMAN NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 093.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. SRINIVAS N., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

SRI. M. NARAYANASWAMY, S/O. LATE M. MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:35379 CRL.A No. 1686 of 2016

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

R/AT NO.75, NEW GNAGAMMA TEMPLE ROAD, 1^ST MAIN, 1^ST CROSS, MAHADEVAPURA, BANGALORE - 560 048.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SRI. SHASHIDHARA., ADVOCATE)

¶21

¶22

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.378(4) CR.P.C BY THE ADV'T

¶23

FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING THAT TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 12.07.2016, PASSED BY THE XIV A.C.M.M., MAYO HALL UNIT AT BANGALORE IN C.C.NO.50941/2014, ACQUITTING THE

¶24

RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT AND ETC.,

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:35379 CRL.A No. 1686 of 2016

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320

¶35

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:35379 CRL.A No. 1686 of 2016

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

On careful reading of the judgment of the Hon’ble 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.

¶39

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

¶40

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.

¶41

The parties shall appear before the jurisdictional Appellate Court / Sessions Court on 17.08 .2026 , without further notice of the concerned Court.

¶42