- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15555 CRL.P No. 5019 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5019 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MAHESH GURUSWAMY S/O LATE GURUSWAMY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.17, 24TH CROSS, BEHIND GOVERNMENT SCHOOL, BASAVANAPURA MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560 036. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRINCE ISAC, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. CHANDRAKALA D/O SRI AKKULAPPA, W/O SRI MAHESH GURUSWAMY, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO.147, 2ND FLOOR, MADHURANAGARA, 1ST STAGE, JANATHA COLONY, VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE-560 087. …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.03.2025 PASSED BY THE 1ST ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE IN CRL.MIS.NO.227/2018, REJECTING THE PETITIONER'S APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 311 CR.P.C BY ORDER DATED 15.03.2025 AND ETC. Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15555 CRL.P No. 5019 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER The petitioner challenges the order passed by the Trial Court, wherein in the proceedings under Section 12 of the protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short `Act, 2005'), an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C to recall PW1 for cross-examination came to be rejected. 2. The respondent filed a petition under Section 12 of the Act, 2005 claiming for protection order under Section 18 and to provide residence, and to pay compensation and damages of Rs.20 lakh. The examination-in-chief of the petitioner therein was completed and the matter was setout for cross- examination of PW1 prompting the Trial Court to treat cross-examination of PW1 as nil. 3. The petitioner filed an application to recall PW1 for cross-examination citing that the Advocate on the relevant date was not present due to ill-health of his father. Without going into the genuineness of the reasons assigned by the petitioner to recall PW1, it would be appropriate to afford one more opportunity to the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15555 CRL.P No. 5019 of 2025 petitioner to cross-examine PW1. Otherwise, the testimony of PW1 will remain un-controverted, which may result in allowing a petition filed under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. No prejudice will be caused to the respondent if the application is allowed. However, in the interest of justice and to prevent a possible miscarriage without hearing the petitioner, it is considered necessary to afford the petitioner one more opportunity to ensure a fair trial. 4. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 15.3.2025 passed in Crl.Mis. No.227/2018 by the learned I Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, is set aside, and the application is allowed permitting the petitioner to cross examine PW1 on the date on which he summoned, failing which, the Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE BKM List No.: 3 Sl No.: 10