Disposed¶37

Sri. Mr. Anish M Rawther @ Anees Mohammed Rawther v. Smt. Dr.Zarina Begum

Karnataka HC15 Oct 2025CRL.P/12957/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC Bengaluru; Justice M.Nagaprasanna; 15 October 2025; CRL.P No. 12957 of 2025; S.311 CrPC application for recall of PW1 rejected for want of reasons; S.138 NI Act complaint CC.No.503/2017, Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC Beluru; trial at fag end; common evidence in connected cases; documents marked in one case to be taken note of in others; petition disposed of without interference.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of without interfering with the trial court's rejection of the Section 311 Cr.P.C. application; direction that any document marked in one connected case, if necessary for the defence of the accused, be permitted to be taken note of in the other connected cases. ¶37

Sri. Mr. Anish M Rawther @ Anees Mohammed Rawther Vs Smt… — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:40942 CRL.P No. 12957 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12957 OF 2025

¶8

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

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI. MR. ANISH M RAWTHER @ ANEES MOHAMMED RAWTHER AGE 44 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 17, II FLOOR, 4^TH MAIN IV BLOCK, GORAGUNTEPALYA, TUMKUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 022.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. SURESHA N., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SMT. DR.ZARINA BEGUM W/O. HAFEEZ UR RAHMAN, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, RESIDING AT HULKODE ESTATE, AREHALLY, BELUR TALUQ, HASSAN DISTRICT-573101.

¶15

Digitallysigned byVISHALNINGAPPAPATTIHAL VISHALNINGAPPAPATTIHAL Location:High Court ofKarnatakaDharwadBenchDate:2025.10.2815:45:40+0530

¶16

ALSO AT NO. 58, 4^TH CROSS, 30^TH MAIN, B.T.M. LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560076 REPRESENTED BY ITS P.O.A. HOLDER SRI. SHOAIB UR RAHMAN.

¶17

M/S. S A RAWTHER SPICES (1) LIMITED (GOVT. RECOGNIZED EXPORT HOUSE) NO. 17, 11 FLOOR, 4^TH MAIN, 4^TH BLOCK, GORAGUNTEPALYA, TUMKUR ROAD BENGALURU-560 022 REPRESENTED BY IRP MS.SUBRAMANIAM ANEETHA HERE R-2 IS NECESSARY PARTY IN THIS CASE

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS DATED 23.08.2025 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC, BELURU IN CC.NO.503/2017, U/S. 138 OF N.I. ACT, WHICH IS ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-E.

¶20

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:40942 CRL.P No. 12957 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

At this juncture, the petitioner/accused is

¶26

before this Court challenging the order rejecting the application filed under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. The rejection was on the ground that the affidavit seeking the recall of PW1 for cross-examination does not disclose any reasons.

¶27

A perusal of the application clearly indicates

¶28

that no reasons have been stated as to why the document is sought to be marked, or why the recall of PW1 for crossexamination is necessary.

¶29

The matter is at the fag end of the trial. In that view of the matter, there is no justification for this Court to interfere with the order passed by the trial court rejecting the application under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C.

¶30

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that common evidence has been led in all the connected cases, and that a document marked in one case

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40942 CRL.P No. 12957 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

ought to be taken note of in the others. This submission merits acceptance. Therefore, any document marked in one case, if necessary for the defence of the accused, shall

¶34

be permitted to be taken note of in the other connected

¶35

cases.

¶36