Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 20391
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K, J
UDAYA VENKATESH BHAT – Appellant
Versus
N NANDISH – Respondent
CRL.RP 1417/2016
SRI. SACHIN B.S, SMT. SUDHANVA D.S
The complainant must appeal an acquittal under the Negotiable Instrument Act in the High Court after obtaining special leave, not in the Session Court.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 378(4) - Criminal revision petition arising from an acquittal judgment - The petitioner filed an appeal before the Session Court instead of the High Court, contrary to the notification dated 17.04.2023 which mandates that appeals against acquittal under the Negotiable Instrument Act must be filed in the High Court after obtaining special leave - The court directed the conversion of the revision petition into a criminal appeal under the correct provision. (Paras 2-5)
(B) Appeals - Procedure - The complainant must challenge an acquittal order before the High Court as per the recent notification, and not before the Session Court, ensuring compliance with procedural requirements. (Paras 3-4)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, having faced an acquittal in C.C.No.263/2013, erroneously filed an appeal before the Session Court instead of the High Court, leading to procedural complications.
Findings of Court:
The court recognized the procedural error and directed the conversion of the revision petition into a criminal appeal under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issue addressed was the appropriate court for appealing an acquittal under the Negotiable Instrument Act as per the recent notification.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the complainant must file an appeal against acquittal orders in the High Court after obtaining special leave, ensuring adherence to the procedural law outlined in Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C.
Result: Criminal revision petition disposed of and converted into a criminal appeal.
DATED 20.04.2015 IN C.C.NO.263/2013 ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PUTTUR, D.K. AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE CRL.A.NO.5013/2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS PRAYED FOR.
Digitally signed by HARIKRISHNA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
- ORDER Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that in view of the notification dated 17.04.2023 of this Court, this criminal revision petition does not survive for consideration as the same arises out of the acquittal judgment passed by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru sitting at Puttur, D.K. in C.A.No.5013/2015 wherein the learned District Judge has confirmed the acquittal order passed in C.C.No.263/2013 dated 20.04.2015.
2. Learned counsel further submits that inadvertently, he has filed the appeal before the Session Court instead of preferring an appeal before this Court under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.' for short).
3. I have perused the notification dated 17.04.2023 which reads as follows:
- "in respect of an appeal arising out of an order of acquittal under Negotiable Instrument Act, the complainant can challenge it only before the High Court as per Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. after obtaining special leave to appeal, and not before the Session Court."
4. In this case, against the acquittal order passed by the trial Court, the revision petitioner preferred an appeal before the Session Court. The Session Court has confirmed the acquittal order against which he has preferred this revision petition.
5. In view of the notification dated 17.04.2023, the Registry is directed to convert this revision petition into criminal appeal under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. For statistical purpose, the criminal revision petition is disposed of.
