- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48902 CRL.P No. 13501 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13501 OF 2024 BETWEEN: KRISHNAIAH M S/O MARUCHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT MUNIYANAPALYA, KITHANAMANGALA POST, KASABA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572130 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANTHOSH KUMAR M B., ADVOCATE) AND: B T NAGARATHNA W/O D NARAYAN AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/ATNO 29, C/O MADHURI MEDICALS, OPP PHENIX MALL, BBMP BUILDING MAHADEVAPURA BENGALURU - 560048 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAGADEESHA B.N., ADDL. SPP FOR R1 SRI. PUNITH C., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48902 CRL.P No. 13501 of 2024 THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 14.11.2024 PASSED BY THE XXIII ADDL. JUDGE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND ACJM, BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-6) IN C.C.NO.11793/2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED U/S 91 OF THE CR.P.C. VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Rejection of the application filed under Section 91 of Cr.P.C. by the trial court has been assailed in this petition. 2. Matter pertains to a proceeding initiated by the respondent against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act. Transaction pertains to the year 2020, wherein the accused is alleged to have issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.7,85,000/-,which got dishonoured with an endorsement 'account closed'. Consequent to which notice was issued and since the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48902 CRL.P No. 13501 of 2024 cheque amount was not paid, the respondent filed a complaint. 3. The material on record reveals that PW1 was examined on 22.09.2022 and his cross-examination was conducted on 14.10.2024. It appears that in the cross- examination, PW1 has stated that he had pledged certain gold ornaments and also borrowed loan from his sister, to substantiate his financial capacity to lend loan to the accused. Application under Section 91 of Cr.P.C. was filed on 07.11.2024 for directing the complainant to place on record her savings bank account, statement at Bank of India, Malleshwaram, for the period of loan transaction and another bank statement maintained by her pledging the gold for lending money, ITR forms for the year 2019- 20 and 2020-21, license copy of Bharati Medicals, Kunigal and Madhuri Medicals, Bangalore, pertaining to the complainant. The said application was filed obviously to direct the complainant to prove his capacity to lend a loan of Rs.7,85,000/- to the accused. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48902 CRL.P No. 13501 of 2024 4. It is to be noted that apart from filing an application under Section 91 Cr.P.C., accused also filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., on 30.09.2024 to recall PW1 for further cross-examination. The said application was allowed by imposing costs. On 14.10.2024, PW1 was cross-examined and the matter was posted for argument and at that time, the application under Section 91 of Cr.P.C., was filed. 5. The learned Magistrate while rejecting the application has observed that it is for the complainant to prove her financial status and if she failed to prove the same, in spite of the dispute raised by the accused, then it will affect the case of the complainant and the burden is not on the accused to prove the financial status of the complainant. Further observed that if the complainant intends to produce the documents out of her own will, prior to conclusion of the case, she has every right to tender the said document by filing necessary application and the accused cannot seek an order to give direction to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48902 CRL.P No. 13501 of 2024 the complainant to produce her own documents to prove her own case. 6. There is no error or illegality in the order passed by the learned Magistrate. There is no merit in the petition. 7. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. 8. The learned Magistrate shall proceed with the case in accordance with law and dispose it as expeditiously as possible. I.A.No.1/2025 is disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE KLY CT: JL