- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7320 CRL.P No. 102517 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102517 OF 2024 482 of Cr.PC)/528 of BNSS) BETWEEN: SHRI SALIM S/O. BABU MAHAT, AGE 64 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. MAHAT GALLI PETH BAGH, NEAR MAKKA MASJID, SANGLI-416416, TQ. AND DIST. SANGLI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI N. L. BATAKURKI, ADVOCATE) AND: SHRI. AAYAJ S/O. NABIRASUL JAMBAGI, AGE 31 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. PRABHAT NAGAR, NEAR DURGA COLONY, JAMKHANDI-587313. …RESPONDENT (BY SHRI RAMESH I. ZIRALI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C, SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF REJECTION OF APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 233 READ WITH SECTION 311 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC JAMAKHANDI IN C.C.NO.1120/2018 DATED 09.07.2024 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY PETITIONER HEREIN IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7320 CRL.P No. 102517 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.” for short) to quash the order dated 09.07.2024 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Jamakhandi, in C.C.No.1120/2018 rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Section 233 read with Section 311 of Cr.P.C. 3. The brief fact of the case of the petitioner is that, the respondent filed private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C against the petitioner alleging that the petitioner and respondent are good friends and the petitioner was in need of money, as such, he approached the respondent in the month of February-2018 and asked for hand loan of Rs.3,50,000/-. Thus, looking to the need of petitioner, the respondent advanced the hand loan of Rs.3,50,000/- and the petitioner promised to repay the said amount within a period - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7320 CRL.P No. 102517 of 2024 of three months, but he did not repay the same. Inspite of several requests made by the respondent, the petitioner postponed the repayment of the hand loan by one or the other reasons. Ultimately, on 07.07.2018 the petitioner issued cheque for sum of Rs.3,50,000/- drawn on Corporation Bank, Jamakhandi in favour of the respondent. On being presentation of the said chqeue, it was dishonored and after issuance of legal notice, the petitioner failed to make payment. Hence, the respondent filed private complaint against the petitioner. 4. During the course of trial, the respondent examined as PW.1 and the petitioner was also examined as DW.1. However, the petitioner filed an application under Section 233 read with Section 311 of Cr.P.C. to examine the witness by name Abdulmajjid Yakub Pendari in favour of petitioner and it was objected by the respondent. The Trial Court rejected the said application filed by the petitioner on the ground that the same is not maintainable. Perused the material available on record including the impugned order and application. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7320 CRL.P No. 102517 of 2024 5. As per Section 311 of Cr.P.C, any Court may, at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code, summon any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness, or recall and re-examine any person already examined; and the Court shall summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person if his evidence appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case. 6. However, the Trial Court at paragraph No.7 of the impugned order has observed that the petitioner has not assigned any particular reasons as to how the witness and documents sought to be produced are in nexus with the present case/transaction. It is for the accused to prove his case and adduce evidence on his behalf. In this case in support of the defence of the accused, he intended to examine one witness along with certain documents. 7. If application is allowed no hardship will be caused to the respondent, at the most disposal of case could postpone for couple of days. On the other hand, if the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7320 CRL.P No. 102517 of 2024 application is not allowed, more hardship or injustice would cause to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Court proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The criminal petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 23.01.2025 passed on application filed under Section 233 read with Section 311 of Cr.P.C in C.C.No.1120/2018 by the Trial Court is hereby quashed. (iii) Application filed by the petitioner under Section 233 read with Section 311 of Cr.P.C before the Trial Court is hereby allowed, subject to costs of Rs.3,000/- payable to the respondent before the Trial Court within a period of 15 days. (iv) The parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 23.06.2025. (v) Both the parties are directed to expedite the matter without seeking unnecessary adjournments. (vi) The Trial Court is directed dispose of the matter within three months from 23.06.2025. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE EM /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35