In a significant procedural ruling, the Karnataka High Court clarified that appeals against acquittal orders passed by a Magistrate under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act lie before the Sessions Court, not the High Court. The Court disposed of the appeal by transferring it to the jurisdictional Sessions Court, emphasizing the binding precedent set by a Co-ordinate Bench and affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The appellant, Raju s/o Tulajappa Khode, filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondent, Akshay s/o Gopal Katwe, alleging dishonour of a cheque. The cheque was issued by the respondent in favour of the appellant but was returned unpaid, leading to the complaint.
Procedural History
- Date of Complaint: The complaint (C.C. No. 31/2024) was filed before the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubli.
- 10.03.2026: The Magistrate acquitted the respondent of the offence under Section 138 NI Act.
- Post-Acquittal: The appellant filed the present Criminal Appeal No. 100246 of 2026 before the Karnataka High Court under Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), seeking to set aside the acquittal and convict the respondent.
Relief Sought
The appellant prayed for:
- Admission of the appeal and setting aside of the acquittal order dated 10.03.2026.
- Conviction of the respondent under Section 138 NI Act.
- Imposition of fine double the cheque amount and compensation to the complainant.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether an appeal against an acquittal order passed by a Magistrate under Section 138 NI Act lies before the High Court or the Sessions Court under Section 378(4) CrPC.
Arguments Presented
For the Appellant
The appellant’s counsel contended that the matter was pending consideration before a larger Bench of the Supreme Court, which might revisit the jurisdictional issue. However, the counsel conceded that the existing precedent - affirmed by the Supreme Court - had not been stayed, implying that the appeal was not maintainable before the High Court.
The Court's Analysis
The Court relied on the binding precedent set by a Co-ordinate Bench of the Karnataka High Court, which had held that appeals against acquittal by a Magistrate lie before the Sessions Court and not the High Court. This view had been affirmed by the Supreme Court, and no stay had been granted against it. The Court observed:
"The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has taken the view that an appeal against an order of acquittal passed by a Magistrate would lie before the Sessions Court and not before the High Court. The said view has been affirmed by the Apex Court."
Given the absence of any stay on the precedent, the Court concluded that the appeal was not maintainable before the High Court and accordingly disposed of it by transferring it to the jurisdictional Sessions Court.
The Verdict
The High Court disposed of the appeal with the following directions:
- The appeal was transferred to the jurisdictional Sessions Court.
- The parties were permitted to amend the cause title of the appeal memo as necessary.
- The appellant was directed to appear before the Appellate Court on 06.07.2026 without awaiting further notice.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Jurisdiction of Appeals Against Acquittal
- Practitioners must note that appeals against acquittal orders passed by a Magistrate under Section 138 NI Act lie before the Sessions Court, not the High Court, unless the precedent is revisited or stayed by a higher court.
- This ruling reinforces the binding nature of judicial precedents even when a larger Bench is considering the issue.
Procedural Compliance Is Non-Negotiable
- Parties must ensure that appeals are filed before the correct forum as per the existing legal framework. Filing before the wrong court could lead to dismissal or transfer, as seen in this case.
- The Court’s direction to appear before the Appellate Court on a specified date underscores the importance of adhering to procedural timelines to avoid adverse consequences.
Implications for Section 138 NI Act Cases
- This judgment highlights the procedural nuances in appeals under Section 138 NI Act, particularly the forum before which such appeals must be filed.
- Practitioners should monitor pending larger Bench decisions that might revisit the jurisdictional issue, as this could impact future filings.
