Karnataka High Court
CRL.A/2136/2024 of SRI.MUNUKUMAR VATAMBETI Vs SRI.HARISH B.M on 4 June 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:26285 CRL.A No. 2136 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2136 OF 2024 ( A ) BETWEEN: SRI.MUNUKUMAR VATAMBETI S/O MUNIKRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2136 OF 2024 (A)
BETWEEN:
SRI.MUNUKUMAR VATAMBETI
S/O MUNIKRISHNAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
RESIDING AT SLV
BULIDERS AND DEVELOPERS,
FLAT NO.401,
SLV SUNSHINE APARTMENTS,
A CROSS, VIJAYA BANK COLONY,
BANSWADI,
BENGALURU – 560 043.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PRUTHVI RAJ R., ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
SUSHMA
LAKSHMI
B S
Location:
High
Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
AND:
SRI.HARISH B.M
S/O SRI. MUNISHAMAIAH,
MAJOR IN AGE,
RESIDING AT NO.76, BYATHA,
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK,
BANGALURU – 560 089.
…RESPONDENT
----
THIS CRL.A FILED U/S 378(4) OF CR.P.C. BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT/S PRAYING THAT THIS
HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DATED 03.09.2024 PASSED IN
CC.NO.15052/2022 BY THE V ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE
JUDGE AND XXIV ACJM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSE MAYO
HALL
UNIT
AT
BENGALURU
AND
CONVICT
THE
ACCUSED/RESPONDENT AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
HC-KAR
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court.
2. 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 1 2025 SCC Online SC 1320
HC-KAR
Section 372 and need not advert to sub- section (4) of Section 378 of the Cr.PC.”
3. On careful reading of the judgment of the Apex Court supra, it is evident that, the complainant being 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.
4. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, in Celestial 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 jurisdictional Appellate Court/Sessions Court.
5. The parties shall appear before the jurisdictional Appellate Court / Sessions Court on 30.06.2026, without further notice of the concerned Court.
6. The Registry shall transmit entire appeal papers including appeal memo to the jurisdictional Sessions Court.
HC-KAR
7. The learned counsel for the appellant shall have the liberty to carry out the amendment in the cause title and also the provisions thereof.
8. For statistical purpose, this appeal stands disposed off.
9. Ordered accordingly.
Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE
NM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15