Sri Mallikarjun S Adagal Vs Sri B M Subbanna — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2026)

Sri Mallikarjun S Adagal Vs Sri B M Subbanna — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal transferred to the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court; parties directed to appear there on 02.07.2026 without further notice; Registry to transmit the entire appeal papers including the appeal memo; learned counsel for appellant at liberty to amend the cause title and provisions; appeal stands disposed of (for statistical purposes) and pending I.As. disposed as not surviving.

Issue for consideration

Whether a criminal appeal against an order of acquittal filed by the complainant under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. is maintainable before the High Court, given the victim's right under the proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. as held in Celestium Financial.

Court's answer

On a careful reading of Celestium Financial, 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, not under Section 378(4).

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 the High Court; since the Court has no jurisdiction to decide the appeal on merit, the appeal is transferred to the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal appeal against acquittal — filed by complainant under S.378(4) Cr.P.C. challenging judgment of acquittal dated 24.04.2024 in C.C.No.20415/2014 of the III A.C.M.M., Bengaluru City (offences u/ss 406, 420, 120B r/w Sec.34 IPC). Held, relying on Celestium Financial v. A. Gnanasekaran, 2025 SCC Online SC 1320: a victim of an offence may prefer an appeal under the proviso to S.372 Cr.P.C. irrespective of whether he is the complainant; hence the complainant, being the victim, must approach the Jurisdictional Sessions Court invoking S.372 Cr.P.C., and an appeal by the complainant against acquittal under S.378(4) is not maintainable before the High Court, which lacks jurisdiction to decide it on merit. The appeal was transferred to the jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court, parties ordered to appear on 02.07.2026, the Registry directed to transmit the appeal papers, counsel permitted to amend the cause title, and the appeal disposed of (for statistical purposes) along with pending I.As.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:29186 CRL.A No. 987 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 987 OF 2024 (A)

BETWEEN:

SRI MALLIKARJUN S. ADAGAL, S/O. SANGAPPA ADAGAL, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT NO.3/1, 8^TH ‘B’ CROSS, KULUME ROAD, SHIVANAHALLI, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 010.

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

(BY SRI. JAGADEESH D. C., ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI B M SUBBANNA

AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT NO.126/18, FIRST FLOOR, (OLD SYNDICATE BANK BUILDING) 4^TH MAIN, 8^TH CROSS, WILSON GARDEN, BENGALURU - 560 027.

…APPELLANT

NC: 2026:KHC:29186 CRL.A No. 987 of 2024

2 -

HC-KAR

ALSO AT S.G. RESIDENCY, 3^RD CROSS, TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD, S. G. PALYA, KAVERY LAYOUT, NEXT TO SAL DENTAL CLINIC, AND NEAR SRI. AYYAPAN TEMPLE, BANGALORE - 560 029.

SMT. NAGAMMA @ NAGARATHNA W/O. SRI. B. M. SUBBANNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, S.G. RESIDENCY, 3^RD CROSS, TAVAREKERE MAIN ROAD, S.G. PALYA, KAVERY LAYOUT, NEXT TO SAI DENTAL CLINIC, AND NEAR SRI. AYYAPAN TEMPLE, BANGALORE - 560 029.

…RESPONDENTS

THIS CRL.A FILED U/S.378(4) CR.PC. BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL DATED 24.04.2024 PASSED IN C.C.NO.20415/2014, BY THE III A.C.M.M BENGALURU CITY, ACQUAINTING THE ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 406, 420, 120B R/W SEC.34 OF IPC AND ETC., THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:29186 CRL.A No. 987 of 2024

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant

being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court.

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

“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.”

1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:29186 CRL.A No. 987 of 2024

HC-KAR

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.

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.

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

The Registry shall transmit the entire appeal papers, including the appeal memo, to the jurisdictional Sessions Court.

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:29186 CRL.A No. 987 of 2024

HC-KAR

The learned counsel for the appellant shall have

the liberty to carry out the amendment in the cause title and also the provisions thereof.

For statistical purposes, this appeal stands

disposed of . Ordered accordingly.

In view of the disposal of the appeal, pending I.A., if any, does not survive for consideration and the same is also disposed of.

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

NM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20