- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14330 CRL.P No. 13880 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13880 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SRI. R. KUMAR S/O. LATE RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT. VENKATESWARASWAMY NILAYA, NO.285, HOSALLI MAIN ROAD, 1ST CROSS, NEAR OLD NALANDA SCHOOL, B.V. RAMANAGARA, HUNSAMARANAHALLI POST, BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU - 562157. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHRIDHARA K., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. A. RAMU S/O. LATE AVULAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT MUNESHWARA BLOCK, VIDYANAGARA CROSS, BETTAHALASURU, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU - 562157. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S.NAGESH, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31.10.2023 IN C.C.NO.2020/2020 BY THE XII ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I. ACT, BY ALLOWING THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 91 OF CR.P.C. FILED BY THE PETITIONER. Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14330 CRL.P No. 13880 of 2023 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Petitioner/accused, being aggrieved by the order dated 31.10.2023 passed in CC.No.2020/2020 on the file of Court of XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru, dismissing the application filed under Section 91 of Cr.P.C, has preferred this petition. 2. Proceedings before the trial Court pertains to a case relating to dishonor of a cheque allegedly issued by the accused for sum of Rs.2,70,000/- drawn on Karnataka Bank Ltd, Hunasamaranahalli Branch, Bengaluru, in favour of complainant. 3. An application under Section 91 of Cr.P.C was filed by the accused to summon the branch manager to produce (i) 'stop payment' letter dated 12.05.2017 (ii) reasons for issuing the wrong endorsement dated - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14330 CRL.P No. 13880 of 2023 14.08.2019 on the questioned cheque bearing No.436254 dated 14.08.2019. 4. Contention of the learned counsel for petitioner is that, cheque was returned by the concerned bank with an endorsement 'funds insufficient' in the account of the accused, however, the accused had issued stop payment letter on 12.05.2017 itself to the bank. It is therefore contended that, when the accused had requested the bank to stop the payment, the endorsement issued by the bank authority for dishonoring the cheque was not proper and the same has prejudiced the accused. 5. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that even in the reply letter issued by the petitioner, he has made it clear that there was a letter issued to the bank for stopping the payment. When the petitioner was examined as DW1, since the complainant put a suggestion that, in order to counter the legal notice, he created Ex.D1-office copy of the letter submitted by the concerned bank authority, he was constrained to file an application - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14330 CRL.P No. 13880 of 2023 under Section 91 of Cr.P.C to summon the branch manager. It is contended that, without any rhyme or reason, the learned Magistrate has dismissed the application and therefore, the same has resulted in miscarriage of justice. 6. The complaint is filed in the year 2019. Vide impugned order dated 31.10.2023, the application filed by the accused under Section 91 of Cr.P.C was rejected. The learned Magistrate has observed that the matter is posted for arguments on merits and at that stage the accused filed the application seeking summoning of bank manager mentioned in the scheduled application and to lead evidence on the said document. It is also observed that the accused has led his evidence completely and even the learned counsel for the complainant has conducted the cross examination of DW1 in detail. 7. It is true that the learned Magistrate has not discussed the necessity to summon the document concerned in the application filed under Section 91 of - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14330 CRL.P No. 13880 of 2023 Cr.P.C. However, the fact remains that the cheque issued by the accused was dishonoured by the bank. The trial Court can consider as to whether the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act was made out or not even where the instrument was returned with endorsements 'stop payment' or 'funds insufficient'. According, to the accused 'stop payment' letter was issued on 12.05.2017. The cheque is dated 14.08.2019 and it was presented to the bank on 16.08.2019. Therefore, after issuance of the cheque, the accused has not sent any letter to the bank for stopping the payment. In that view of the matter, the impugned order passed by the trial Court has not prejudiced the accused. Accused can take all contentions at the time of addressing his arguments, which may be considered by the trial Court. The initial burden to prove the case is always on the complainant. The matter is pending before the trial Court since 2019. Hence, be disposed of as expeditiously as possible. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:14330 CRL.P No. 13880 of 2023 With the above observation, Petition is disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE PK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10