Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 34944 (KAR)

RISHABH NARAYAN v. DEEPA NARASINHA NAIK

CRL.P/12270/2024 · 2025-03-04

Hemant Chandangoudar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10408 CRL.P No. 12270 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12270 OF 2024 BETWEEN: RISHABH NARAYAN S/O ASHOK NARAIN LAL AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC: BANK EMPLOYEE, EMP ID 687555, R/AT. CANARA BANK, NO.14, NAVEEN COMPLEX, MG ROAD, HEAD OFFICE ANNEX, BANGALORE-560001 AND ALSO R/A G-4, SAI APARTMENT, 21ST CROSS, 7TH MAIN, BTM 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KIRAN KUMAR H, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAJATH, ADVOCATE) AND: DEEPA NARASINHA NAIK W/O RISHABH NARAYAN, D/O NARASINHA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/A HOUSE NO.813//B1, 3RD FLOOR, 27TH MAIN, BTM SECOND STAGHE, BANGALORE-560076 …RESPONDENT Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10408 CRL.P No. 12270 of 2024 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 27.09.2024 PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS (MMTC- 1) (TRAFFIC COURT-1) AT MAYOHALL, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE ON I.A. FILED BY THE RESPONDENT U/S 311 OF CR.P.C. IN CRL.MISC.NO.239/2021 AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION AND PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO CROSS EXAMINE THE PW.1 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner challenges the order passed by the Trial Court rejecting the application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. to recall P.W.1 for cross-examination. 2. The respondent filed a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. After entering an appearance, the petitioner filed objections. The petitioner was examined as P.W.1, and the matter was set for cross-examination. Despite being granted several opportunities, the petitioner did not choose to cross-examine P.W.1. Consequently, the cross- examination of P.W.1 was recorded as “Nil,” and the matter was set for the evidence of respondent No.1. 3. Service of notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10408 CRL.P No. 12270 of 2024 4. A perusal of the order sheet indicates that although several opportunities were granted, the petitioner did not cross-examine P.W.1. Be that as it may, if the petitioner is not permitted to cross-examine P.W.1, the testimony of P.W.1 would remain unchallenged, which would result in allowing the petition and thereby affect the petitioner’s rights. Under such circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to one more opportunity to cross- examine P.W.1. 5. Accordingly, the following order is passed: ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. The order dated 27.09.2024 passed by the JMFC (MMTC-1) (Traffic Court-1), Mayohall, M.G.Road, Bangalore on I.A. filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. in Crl. Misc. No.239/2021 is set aside and the application is allowed. The petitioner is permitted to cross examine P.W.1 on the date the respondent herein is summoned , failing which the Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE RKA, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55