- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15584 CRL.P No. 104213 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.104213 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI. NAVEEN S/O. MUSHAPPAGOWDA MULKIGOUDAR, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/AT. PLOT NO.7, JAYANAGAR, HUBBALLI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N.D. GUNDE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SURESH N.KINI, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH POLICE INSPECTOR, VIDYANAGAR POLICE STATION, HUBBALLI, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAVEEN Y.DEVAREDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS, 2023/482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO, QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.09.2025 PASSED IN SESSIONS CASE NO.70/2018 BY THE COURT OF V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE DHARWAD, SITTING AT HUBBALLI DISMISSING THE INTERIM APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 311 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ALLOW THE SAID INTERIM APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 311 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FILED IN SESSIONS CASE NO.70/2018 BY THE LEARNED COURT OF V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE DHARWAD, SITTING AT HUBBALLI AND RECALL PW-47 FOR FURTHER CROSS EXAMINATION AND ETC.,. Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15584 CRL.P No. 104213 of 2025 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.RACHAIAH) 1. The petitioner/accused No.1 is before this Court seeking to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.70/2018 pending on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad1, for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 120(B), 201 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 18602. 2. Heard Sri. Neelendra D. Gunde, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Praveen Y. Devaraddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State. 3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., was filed before the Trial Court seeking for recalling of PW47, who is the material witness to the said case. However, the Trial Court while considering the said 1 For short, ‘the Trial Court’ 2 For short, ‘IPC’ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15584 CRL.P No. 104213 of 2025 application opined that, the said witness has been cross examined adequately. Now, they filed the application for the purpose of protracting the proceedings only in order to harass the witness etc. 4. It is further submitted that, in order to maintain a fair trial, it is necessary to recall PW47 for the purpose of further cross examination. If such an opportunity is denied, certainly it would cause prejudice to the petitioners. Therefore, it is appropriate to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent - State opposed the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and justified the order of the Trial Court and he submitted that, PW47 who is none other than the Civil Judge who recorded the statement of the witnesses under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. PW47 has been cross examined by the counsels representing the accused, however, recalling the said witness for the purpose of conducting further cross examination certainly would indicate that, it is only for the purpose of filling up of the lacuna which is impermissible under law. Therefore, it is not - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15584 CRL.P No. 104213 of 2025 appropriate to allow the said application. Making such submissions, he prays to reject the petition. 6. Having heard the rival submission of the learned counsels for the respective parties, the application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., is filed for the purpose of recalling of PW47 for the purpose of conducting further cross examination. The averments of the application would indicate that certain procedures were to be followed while recording the statement of the witnesses. However, those procedures were not followed. If such procedures were not to be followed, the statement of those witnesses certainly would loses its significance. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that it is necessary to allow the said application in order to maintain fair Trial. 7. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 19.09.2025 passed in S.C.No.70/2018 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15584 CRL.P No. 104213 of 2025 Dharwad (sitting at Hubballi), is hereby quashed. (iii) PW-47 is directed to appear before the Trial Court to render his evidence on 28.11.2025. (iv) The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to conduct cross examination on that day, without fail, and no further adjournment will be given at any cost. Sd/- (S.RACHAIAH) JUDGE SMM/CT:UMD LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 26