Dismissed¶51

Mahadevaiah @ Mahadevappa v. M P Nagaraj

Karnataka HC24 Nov 2025CRL.P/12307/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court (M.I. Arun, J.), CRL.P No. 12307 of 2022, decided 24.11.2025: dismissal of Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition by accused in Section 138 NI Act case; upholds rejection of Section 91 Cr.P.C. application to summon Manager, Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank (Gopala Gowda Extension Branch) and Section 311 Cr.P.C. application to recall stage for further cross-examination of PW.1, absent tenable reasons; impugned order dated 16.11.2022 in C.C.No.3165/2017, V Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Shivamogga.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was rightly rejected because no tenable reason was assigned as to why PW.1 had to be recalled and cross-examined; the petitioner neither specified why further cross-examination was necessary nor why he could not do so on earlier occasions. ¶49

Mahadevaiah @ Mahadevappa Vs M P Nagaraj — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:48444 CRL.P No. 12307 of 2022

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12307 OF 2022

¶8

(482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS))

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

MAHADEVAIAH @ MAHADEVAPPA S/O MADAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

¶11

POLICE DEPARTMENT R/O BLOCK TYPE 2D, Q.NO.10 DAR ASI POLICE QUARTERS ASHOK NAGAR SHIVAMOGGA-577 201.

¶12

&PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. SANDESH T.B., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

M.P.NAGARAJ

¶17

S/O PARAMESHWARAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RETIRED CONSTABLE CENTRAL SECURITY POST INDUSTRIAL NOW R/O 106, VEERANNA LAYOUT 5^TH CROSS, 5^TH STAGE, VINOBHA NAGAR SHIVAMOGGA-577 201.

¶18

&RESPONDENT

¶19

(BY SRI. SUPREETH SURESH ATHREYAS, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. V.K.BHAT, ADVOCATE)

¶20

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16.11.2022 PASSED BY THE V ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT

¶21

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:48444 CRL.P No. 12307 of 2022

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

SHIVAMOGGA, IN C.C.NO.3165/2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND ALLOW THE APPLICATIONS UNDER SECTIONS 91 AND 311 OF THE CR.P.C. FILED BY THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED BEFORE THE V ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT SHIVAMOGGA IN C.C.NO.3165/2017.

¶24

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

The respondent has initiated proceedings against the petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. During the course of proceedings, respondent has let in his evidence and the petitioner has cross-examined the witnesses. Thereafter, the petitioner has made two applications, one under Section 91 of Cr.P.C. and another under Section 311 of Cr.P.C, the same reads as under:

¶28

"UNDER SECTION 91 OF CR.P.C. THE APPLICATION FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED IS AS FOLLOWS:

¶29

1. That the above case is posted for further proceedings.

¶30

2. It is submitted that, the accused intend to address his evidence of the witness. The Manager,

¶31

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:48444 CRL.P No. 12307 of 2022

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Pragathi Krishna Gramina Gopala Gowda Extension, Branch, Shimoga, in respect of the complaint transacted in this bank now it is every much and essential to directing the Manager Pragathi Krishna Gramina Bank, to produce the documents transacted by him and speak about the documents before the court in this regard. Under the above circumstances, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Direct the Manager, to produce entire documents of the complainant transacted with the aforesaid bank, of his account and depose evidence before the court in this case. If the application is not considered the accused will be put to untold hardship and inconvenience.

¶35

Therefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Manager, Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank, Gopala Gowda Extension Branch, Branch Code No.577024202 as details stated in the witness list enclosed with the application, and to give the details transactions of the complainant with the bank, came before the court and depose evidence then produce the documents pertaining transacted by the complainant in the ends of justice."

¶36

"UNDER SECTION 311 OF CR.P.C. APPLICATION FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED IS AS FOLLOWS:

¶37

1. That the above cause is posted for evidence on today.

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:48444 CRL.P No. 12307 of 2022

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

2. It is further submitted in this case further cross of PW1 for proper adjudication in this case is very essential and hence, it now it is just and necessary to recall the stage of the case from defence evidence to further cross of PW1., if the above case stage is not recalled, the accused will be put to untold hardship and inconvenience

¶41

THEREFORE, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to recall the stage of the case from defence evidence, to further cross of PW1., by allowing the application in the ends of justice."

¶42

The trial Court has rejected both the applications.

¶43

Aggrieved by the same, the present criminal petition is filed with the following prayers:

¶44

"WHEREFORE it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to set aside the order dated 16.11.2021 passed by the V Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court Shivamogga, in C.C.No.3165/2017 vide Annexure-"G" and allow the application under Section 91 and 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure, filed by the Petitioner/accused before the V Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court Shivamogga, in in C.C.No.3165/2017, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶45

3. As can be seen from the application filed under

¶46

Section 311, the same is filed to further cross-examine PW.1.

¶47

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:48444 CRL.P No. 12307 of 2022

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

No tenable reason is assigned by the petitioner in the application as to why PW.1 has to be recalled and crossexamined. He has to specify why he has to further crossexamine PW.1 and why he was not able to do so on earlier occasions. The same has not been done.

¶50

In the application filed under Section 91 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner has not explained why he has to cross-examine the manager of a particular bank which he is sought to summon.

¶51

Under the circumstances, in my opinion the trial Court has rightly rejected both the applications of the petitioner. I do not see any error in the order passed by the trial Court. Hence, the petition stands dismissed .

¶52

SD/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶53

PGG

¶54

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20

Mahadevaiah @ Mahadevappa v. M P Nagaraj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahadevaiah @ Mahadevappa v. M P Nagaraj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Mubashira Taj Vs State O Karnataka

K P Dilip Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Vismitha Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Arvind Kambar Vs State of Karnataka by

Mahadevaiah Vs Shivalingaiah M C

Sri. Vishwanath K, Vs State of Karnataka