- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28408 CRL.P No. 6457 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6457 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS) BETWEEN: NINGEGOWDA S/O BOREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT 10TH ‘B’ CROSS, ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGAR, RAJAGOPALA WARD, NEAR MANJUNATH CONDIMENTS, BEHIND VEERABHADRA TEMPLE, BANGALORE – 560 070. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BHARGAVA D. BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND: HEMAVATHI A M W/O GIRISH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT VADERAHALLI VILLAGE, KALINGANHALLI POST, BELLUR HOBLI, NAGAMANGALA TALUK – 571 432. …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2025 IN C.C NO.110/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, NAGAMANGALA (AS PER ANNEXURE D). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28408 CRL.P No. 6457 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This petition by the accused in C.C.No.110/2023 is directed against the impugned order dated 28.03.2025 whereby the application filed by the respondent-complainant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for permission to seek reopening of the case for further examination-in-chief of PW1 for marking of the legal notice on 13.01.2022 was allowed by the Trial Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent – complainant instituted the aforesaid proceedings against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and in the said proceedings, respondent examined himself as PW1 and was cross-examined by the petitioner – accused. At the stage of arguments, the respondent filed the instant application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. seeking recalling of PW1 for further examination-in-chief. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28408 CRL.P No. 6457 of 2025 4. The said application was opposed by the petitioner – accused interalia contending that the legal notice dated 13.01.2022 was already marked as Ex.P3 was already on record and as such, it was not permissible for the respondent to seek permission to adduce further evidence by one more notice dated 13.01.2022 and the application was liable to be dismissed. After hearing both sides, the Trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned order by allowing the application by providing one more opportunity to the respondent – complainant by leading to further examination-in-chief to PW1 by holding as under: “The complainant has filed this application U/Sec 311 of Cr.P.C., seeking reopen the case for further examination- in-chief of PW1 for marking of legal notice dated 13.01.2022. 2. In the application, it is contended that, the complainant has filed this case against the accused for the offence punishable U/sec.138 of N.I. Act. The case is pending for argument. Due to oversight legal notice of some other case has been marked in this case. As such, it is necessary to mark legal notice dated 13.01.2022 relating to this case. As such, it is necessary to reopen the case for further examination-in-chief of PWI for marking of legal notice dated 13.01.2022 in the interest of justice and equity. Hence, it is prayed to allow the application. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28408 CRL.P No. 6457 of 2025 3. The accused has filed objection by contending that, the application is not maintainable in the eye of law. There is no valid reason to sustain the application. Therefore, it is prayed reject the application. 4. Heard, both side and perused the records. 5. The Points that arise for my consideration are: 1. Whether the complainant has made out sufficient grounds to allow the application? 2. What Order? 6. My findings to the above Points are as under: Point No.1: In the Affirmative. Point No.2: As per final order for the following:. REASONS 7. POINT NO.1: This is a case arising out of private complaint filed by the complainant under Sec.200 of Cr.P.C., against the accused for the offence punishable U/sec.138 of N.I. Act. 8. In the application, it is stated that, Due to oversight legal notice of some other case has been marked in this case. As such, it is necessary to mark legal notice dated 13.01.2022 relating to this case. As such, it is necessary to reopen the case for further examination-in-chief of PW1 for marking of legal notice dated 13.01.2022. From the perusal of records, it could be seen that, the plea of the complainant is the legal notice of some other case has been marked in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28408 CRL.P No. 6457 of 2025 this case. According to the complainant, the said mistake was caused due to over sight. It is true that, the cross- examination of PW-1 is also completed. However, it is for the complainant to prove her case as alleged. As such, it is just and proper to provide an opportunity for the complainant to lead further examination-in-chief. Hence, this court is the opinion that, it is just and proper to provide an opportunity to the complainant for further examination-in-chief of PW1 for marking of legal notice dated 13.01.2022. Hence, this court answered Point No.1 is in the Affirmative. 9. POINT NO.2: for the foregoing reasons, this court proceed to pass the following: ORDER Application filed U/Sec.311 of Cr.P.C., by the accused is hereby allowed. Accordingly, case is reopened for further examination- in-chief of PW-1 only for marking of legal notice dated 13.01.2022.” 5. Upon reconsideration, re-appreciation and re- evaluation of the entire material on record, I do not find any illegality, infirmity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court in the present petition and in addition thereto, all contentions urged by the petitioner in the present petition as well as in relation to the evidence / further evidence to be adduced by the respondent – complainant and all rival contentions urged on all - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28408 CRL.P No. 6457 of 2025 aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. 6. Petitioner would be entitled to urge all his contentions in the present petition as well as in relation to evidence / further evidence to be adduced by the respondent including cross- examination PW1 in respect of further examination in addition to PW1. 7. Under these circumstances, I do not find any merit in the petition and the same is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 3 Sl No.: 2