Papanna Vs K P Sathish — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2026)

Papanna Vs K P Sathish — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of by directing: transfer of the entire record including requisitioned trial court copies to the concerned Principal District & Sessions Judge for assignment to the competent Appellate Court; issuance of Court notice to both parties by the transferee court and proceeding in accordance with law; transfer of pending applications (including condonation of delay) for consideration by the transferee Court; expeditious disposal requested; appellant permitted to amend the cause-title and provisions; merits left open.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellant, being the complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, who had filed the appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is entitled as a victim to file/appeal against the acquittal before the Sessions Court under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. (corresponding proviso to Section 413 BNSS, 2023), instead of proceeding in the High Court under Section 378(4). +1 more

Court's answer

In the light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's recent clarification in Celestium Financial, the appellant/complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, being considered a victim, is entitled to file an appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court before the Sessions Court.

Ratio / Principle

Since hearing the appeal at the High Court stage could deprive the parties of the available forum of this Court for further challenge, the appeal is deemed fit to be transferred to the concerned appellate Court of Sessions, to be considered as an appeal under the proviso to Section 413 of BNSS, 2023 (formerly Section 372 of Cr.P.C.) and numbered accordingly.

Key takeaways

This Court has made no observations as to the merits of the case; all rights and contentions of the parties are left open to be agitated before the transferee Court.obiter¶57

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Appeal — appeal by complainant against acquittal under S.138 NI Act filed under S.378(4) Cr.P.C. — Celestium Financial v. A Gnanasekaran (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1320) relied upon: complainant is a victim entitled to appeal under proviso to S.372 Cr.P.C. irrespective of being complainant, without resorting to S.378(4) — similar views of High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chattisgarh, Delhi and Karnataka benches noted — hearing the appeal at the High Court stage could deprive parties of this Court as an available forum for further challenge — appeal transferred to the concerned appellate Court of Sessions to be considered and renumbered as an appeal under proviso to S.413 BNSS, 2023 (formerly S.372 Cr.P.C.) — Registry to transfer entire record including requisitioned trial court records to Principal District & Sessions Judge; transferee court to issue Court notice to parties; pending applications including condonation of delay also transferred; expeditious disposal requested — appellant permitted to amend cause-title — no observations on merits; all rights and contentions left open — appeal stands disposed of (G Basavaraja, J.; 09.01.2026).

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1382 CRL.A No. 2323 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2323 OF 2024 (A)

BETWEEN:

PAPANNA S/O MARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O HOLALU VILLAGE, DUDDA HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571401

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. HARIPRASAD M.B., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

K.P.SATHISH S/O N. PAPEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O KADENAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, MELUKOTE HOBLI, PANDAVAPURA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT-571431

…RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. SHARADAMBA A.R., ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO A. SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT (ORDER) DATED

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1382 CRL.A No. 2323 of 2024

HC-KAR

11.11.2024, PASSED IN C.C.NO.1551/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE JMFC-II, MANDYA IN ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED AND CONVICT THE RESPONDENT TO THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the

appellant/complainant being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal dated 11.11.2024 passed in C.C.No.1551/2021 by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Mandya (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 Cr.P.C. was inserted in the statue book only

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:1382 CRL.A No. 2323 of 2024

HC-KAR

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 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. "

3. 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 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.

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:1382 CRL.A No. 2323 of 2024

HC-KAR

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. URMIT MADRAH 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 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

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:1382 CRL.A No. 2323 of 2024

HC-KAR

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 Coordinate 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.P.C) and numbered accordingly. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

6 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1382 CRL.A No. 2323 of 2024

HC-KAR

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

7 -

NC: 2026:KHC:1382 CRL.A No. 2323 of 2024

HC-KAR

dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible;

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

BKN

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25