M/S. Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance Company Pvt. Ltd., Vs Raghunath B.S.

REPRESENTED BY ITS GPA HOLDER P.J. SANIL, S/O. SHANTHI JOSEPH, AND AT PRESENT REPRESENTED BY THE PRESENT GPA HOLDER, NAVEEN KUMAR. V, S/O. VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. M ABDUL RAHIMAN, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

RAGHUNATH B.S. AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, NO.631, RAMAIAH COMPLEX,

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:10627 CRL.A No. 300 of 2017

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

OPP. BHARATHI THEATRE, NETHAJI NAGAR, T.D. HALLI, BENGALURU-560 057.

¶20

…RESPONDENT

¶21

(NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶22

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS PERTAINING TO CC NO.29699/2014 ON THE FILE OF XXIV ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (SCH NO.20) BENGALURU CITY AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.11.2016 PASSED IN C.C.NO.29699/2014 AND RESTORE THE COMPLAINT BACK TO THE FILE OF XXIV ADDL. CMM (SCCH NO.20) BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ETC.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant being aggrieved by the order dated 19.11.2016 passed in CC No.29699/2014 by the XXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, (SCH No.20), Bengaluru City (for short "the trial Court"), whereby the case came to be dismissed for not taking steps.

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:10627 CRL.A No. 300 of 2017

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

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:

¶30

" 10. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of CrPC 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 appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of 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 sub-section (4) of Section 378 of Cr.PC. "

¶31

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 order 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

¶32

4 -

¶33

NC: 2026:KHC:10627 CRL.A No. 300 of 2017

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

stage, it could deprive the parties of an available forum, i.e. this Court, for further challenge.

¶36

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.PC) and numbered accordingly. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶37

O R D E R

¶38

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;

¶39

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;

¶40

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:10627 CRL.A No. 300 of 2017

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

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;

¶43

iv. Considering the fact that 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;

¶44

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

¶45

vi. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observation 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.

¶46

In the light of the above observation and directions,

¶47

appeal stands disposed of.

¶48

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶49

GSR,List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7

M/S. Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance Company Pvt. Ltd., v. Raghunath B.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance Company Pvt. Ltd., v. Raghunath B.S.

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 G.M. Channappa Vs Gopamma

Sri Srinivas Vs State of Karnataka

Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd. Vs Mrs Seethimani S B

S Seetharam Vs H v Shivakumari

Sri Y G Ashwath Vs Sri Srihar Babu @ R Sridhar

Smt. Kaushy Lal Vs Regal Machine Tools Pvt. Ltd.