SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 438542

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
G BASAVARAJA
SMT IRENE CRASTA – Appellant
Versus
MR N DIVAKAR PRABHU – Respondent
CRL.A 28/2013



CRL.A No. 27 of 2013

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 28 OF 2013 (A)

C/W

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2013 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 27 OF 2013

IN CRL. A NO.28/2013:

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. IRENE CRASTA

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

WIFE OF VICTOR CRASTA

R/AT 'VEERA VILLA'

PALADKABETTU HOUSE

PALADKA

MITHABAIL POST

MANGALORE TALUK

Digitally signed by

LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: HIGH COURT

OF KARNATAKA …APPELLANT

(BY SMT. SAKSHA BHAGAVAN., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. MR. N DIVAKAR PRABHU

AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS

SON OF PUNDALIK PRABHU

RESIDING AT NADUBALIKE HOUSE

IRUVAIL POST AND VILLAGE

MANGALORE TALUK - 574 144

…RESPONDENT

CRL.A No. 27 of 2013 HC-KAR THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL DATED 22.11.2012 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, MOODBIDRI IN C.C.NO.49/2008 AND CONSEQUENTLY CONVICT THE ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I.

ACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

IN CRL. A NO.26/2013:

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. IRENE CRASTA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS WIFE OF VICTOR CRASTA R/AT 'VEERA VILLA'

PALADKABETTU HOUSE PALADKA MITHABAIL POST MANGALORE TALUK …APPELLANT (BY SMT. SAKSHA BHAGAVAN., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. MR. N DIVAKAR PRABHU AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS SON OF PUNDALIK PRABHU RESIDING AT NADUBALIKE HOUSE IRUVAIL POST AND VILLAGE MANGALORE TALUK - 574 144 …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. KAVITHA D., ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL DATED 22.11.2012 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, MOODBIDRI IN C.C.NO.50/2008 AND CONSEQUENTLY CONVICT THE ACCUSED CRL.A No. 27 of 2013 HC-KAR FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I.

ACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

IN CRL. A NO.27/2013:

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. IRENE CRASTA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS WIFE OF VICTOR CRASTA R/AT 'VEERA VILLA'

PALADKABETTU HOUSE PALADKA MITHABAIL POST MANGALORE TALUK …APPELLANT (BY SMT. SAKSHA BHAGAVAN., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. MR. N DIVAKAR PRABHU AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS SON OF PUNDALIK PRABHU RESIDING AT NADUBALIKE HOUSE IRUVAIL POST AND VILLAGE MANGALORE TALUK - 574 144 …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL DATED 22.11.2012 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, MOODBIDRI IN C.C.NO.51/2008 AND CONSEQUENTLY CONVICT THE ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I.

ACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRL.A No. 27 of 2013 HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. These appeals are filed by the appellant/complainant being aggrieved by the Judgment of acquittal dated 22.11.2012 passed in C.C.NO.49/2008, C.C.NO.50/2008 and C.C.NO.51/2008 by the Civil Judge and JMFC, Moodbidri (for short "the trial Court").

2. 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:

"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."

CRL.A No. 27 of 2013 HC-KAR

3. 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 judgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court before the Sessions Court, since he is considered to be a victim.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top