Jayantha M Vs D Y Kirankumar

JAYANTHA M S/O MANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST AND BILL COLLECTOR, AT KELADI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, R/O KELADI, SAGAR TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT – 577 401.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. MAHABALESHWARA RAO K N., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

D. Y. KIRANKUMAR S/O LATE D. YASHAVANTH

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:28772 CRL.A No. 970 of 2024

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC: POLICE CONSTABLE, R/O. B K ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR, SAGAR, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 401.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

¶21

THIS CRL.A FILED U/S 378(4) CR.PC BY THE

¶22

ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.02.2024 IN C.C.NO.1710/2023 ON THE FILE OF ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT SAGAR, AND CONSEQUENTLY PASS AN ORDER CONVICTING THE RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 AND ETC.,

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶25

3 -

¶26

NC: 2026:KHC:28772 CRL.A No. 970 of 2024

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

“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.”

¶32

1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320

¶33

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:28772 CRL.A No. 970 of 2024

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

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.

¶36

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.

¶37

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

¶38