- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16706 CRL.P No. 4638 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4638 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SMT GEETHA W/O UDAYAKUMAR S AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO.2160, 22ND CROSS HEBBAL II STAGE MYSORE - 570 016. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. LOURDU MARIYAPPA A., ADVOCATE) AND: SMT RENUKA B W/O PUTTARAJU AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.646 MARIGUDI ROAD MACHNEGOWDA KOPPALU VIJAYANAGARA POST MYSURU 560 017. …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO A. SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE V JMFC MYSURU IN C.C.NO.934/2023, DATED 24.06.2024, AT ANNEXURE-A, ON THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 311 OF CR.P.C, FILED BY THE PETITIONER/COMPLIANT AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16706 CRL.P No. 4638 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Service of notice to the respondent is dispensed with. 1. The petitioner challenges the order passed by the trial Court whereby the application filed under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. to recall PW.1 for further examination-in- chief was rejected. 2. The complainant had filed a complaint for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant was examined as PW.1, and during cross-examination, a suggestion was put forth that the petitioner did not possess the financial capacity to lend the amount as alleged in the complaint. 3. Consequently, the petitioner filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. seeking to recall PW.1 for further examination-in-chief, in order to produce his bank account statement and sale deed, to establish that he had the financial capacity to lend money to the accused. However, the trial Court dismissed the said application. 4. In view of the suggestion made during cross- examination questioning the petitioner’s financial capacity, the trial Court ought to have permitted the petitioner to produce relevant documentary evidence in support of his - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16706 CRL.P No. 4638 of 2025 claim. Denial of such an opportunity has caused prejudice to the petitioner. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the trial Court is not legally sustainable. ORDER i. Accordingly, petition is allowed. ii. The order dated 24.06.2024 passed by the Hon'ble Fifth JMFC, Mysuru in C.C.No.934/2023 on the application filed under Section 311 of the Cr,P.C., is hereby set aside and consequently the application is allowed. iii. The petitioner is permitted to lead further examination-in-chief on the date on which the witness is summoned, failing which, the trial Court shall proceed in accordance with law. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE TIN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16