Dismissed¶39

Sri Nasrulla v. Sri Basavaraj Bhandare

Karnataka HC20 Nov 2025CRL.P/1974/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC (M.I. Arun, J., 20-11-2025) dismisses CRL.P No. 1974 of 2024 under S.482 CrPC seeking recall of PW1 and permission to cross-examine him in a S.138 NI Act complaint (C.C.No.465/2018, Harihar). Around 19 dates already granted; no bona fide reason shown; trial Court's S.311 CrPC rejection (10.11.2021) and Revisional Court's order in Cr.R.P.No.57/2021 (04.08.2023) upheld. Keywords: cross-examination opportunities exhausted, recall of witness refused, S.311 CrPC, S.138 NI Act, S.482 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

No bona fide reason was shown by the petitioner for his inability to cross-examine PW1 despite around 19 dates having been granted. ¶38

Sri Nasrulla Vs Sri Basavaraj Bhandare — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:47995 CRL.P No. 1974 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1974 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI NASRULLA S/O MOHABOOB SAB AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS OCCUPATION: ALUMINUM WORKER R/O 1^ST MAIN, 1^ST CROSS NEAR A.M.SHADI MAHAL BADHA MAKAN HARIHAR-577601

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. HAREESH BHANDARY T.,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

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

¶14

SRI BASAVARAJ BHANDARE S/O VITTAL RAO T.BHANDARE AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O 2^ND MAIN, 8^TH CROSS VIJAYANAGAR HARIHAR-577601 ALSO AT SRI BASAVARAJ BHANDARE S/O VITTAL RAO T BHANDARE AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS OCCUPATION-SECRET4ARY HTHBCS LTD HARIHAR

¶15

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:47995 CRL.P No. 1974 of 2024

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

R/O BHARATH OIL MILL COMPOUND HARIHAR-577601

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SRI. M K BHASKARAIAH.,ADVOCATE)

¶21

THIS CRL.PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.08.2023 MADE IN CR.RP.NO.57/2021 BY THE COURT OF II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DAVANAGERE AND THE ORDER DATED 10.11.2021 MADE IN C.C.NO.465/2018 BY THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HARIHAR U/S 138 R/W 142 OF N.I ACT AND DIRECT THE TRIAL COURT TO RECALL PW.1 AND PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO CROSS EXAMINE PW.1.,

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

The respondent is the complainant and the petitioner

¶25

is the accused in C.C.No.465/2018, pending on the file of the I Addl.Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC, Harihar. The proceedings are initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'the N.I.Act'). In spite of granting sufficient opportunity to the petitioner

¶26

to cross-examine PW1, he has failed to cross-examine him

¶27

completely. A perusal of the orders passed by the trial

¶28

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:47995 CRL.P No. 1974 of 2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Court as well as the Revisional Court shows that on

¶32

several occasions the evidence of PW1 was closed and the petitioner sought to reopen the same and the permission was granted. In spite of it, the petitioner herein has not cross-examined PW1. It is noticed that around 19 dates were granted to the petitioner to cross-examine PW1 and he has failed to do so, because of which the trial Court rejected his application filed under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Cr.P.C'), wherein permission was sought to again cross-examine PW1. The said order was challenged in Crl.Rev.Pet.No.57/2021, which also came to be rejected. Aggrieved by the same, the present petition is filed with the following prayer:

¶33

"WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the order dated 04.08.2023 made in Cr.R.P.No.57/2021 by the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere and the order dated 10.11.2021 made in C.C.No.465/2018 by the Court of Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C Court, Harihar U/S 138 R/W

¶34

¶35

NC: 2025:KHC:47995 CRL.P No. 1974 of 2024

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

142 of N.I.Act and direct the trial Court to recall PW1 and permit the petitioner to cross examine PW1, in the interest of justice."

¶38

Admittedly, 19 dates were granted to the petitioner to cross-examine PW1, which he has failed to do so. The complaint was filed in the year 2018. The petitioner has successfully dragged the same. As no bona fide reason is shown by the petitioner as to why he was unable to cross-examine PW1 inspite of granting around 19 dates, I do not see any reason to interfere with the well-reasoned orders passed by the trial Court and the Revisional Court.

¶39

For the aforementioned reasons, the Criminal Petition is hereby dismissed.

¶40

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶41

¶42

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32

Sri Nasrulla v. Sri Basavaraj Bhandare

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Nasrulla v. Sri Basavaraj Bhandare

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

Sri Revanna H D Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Ananda Murthy M Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri Ramesh Kumar Kothari Vs the State of Karnataka

Vijay Agarwal @ Vijay Swamy Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Sundari Poojarthi W/O. Angara Poojari Vs Sri Nagappa Poojari S/O. Choova Poojari

V Nataraju Vs the State of Karnataka