- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41947 CRL.P No. 12610 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12610 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI SIDDAPPA S/O ESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT BYALAHALU VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577541. …PETITIONER (BY SRI PRAVEENA KUMARA NIRVANI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY DAVANAGERE RURAL POLICE, REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI RAHUL RAI K, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED COMMON ORDER DATED 13.08.2024 PLEASED TO PASSED BY THE HONBLE ADDL.DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE FTSC-I AT, DAVANAGERE IN S.C NO.82/2022. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41947 CRL.P No. 12610 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is seeking to set-aside the order dated 13.08.2024 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Davanagere in S.C.No.82/2022. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. Perused the material on record. 3. Vide impugned order, the learned Sessions Judge has allowed the application filed by the prosecution under Section 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') and issued summons to P.W.8 and P.W.10 for further examination. 4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the victim P.W.8 was examined on 12.09.2023. She has admitted that no documents pertaining to her age was collected by the Police and now the prosecution to fill-up the lacuna, has come-up with an - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41947 CRL.P No. 12610 of 2025 application to produce additional material and to further examine P.W.8 and P.W.10. Learned counsel contended that the Doctor who is examined as P.W.10 is not the concerned person to produce SSLC marks card and it was the duty of the Investigating Officer to collect the material during investigation and should have submitted those documents at the time of filing the final report. Learned counsel further contended that the prosecution has adduced the evidence based on the documents produced by the Investigating Officer by filing the charge sheet. The documents which are now sought to be relied were not served upon the accused and therefore, the impugned order allowing the application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. caused serious prejudice to the accused. 5. Learned High Court Government Pleader contends that the Trial Court having found that the documents which the prosecution is relying is relevant, has allowed the said application. He contended that the impugned order was passed on 13.08.2024 and after an - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41947 CRL.P No. 12610 of 2025 inordinate delay, the said order is challenged by the petitioner/accused, with the sole intention of dragging the proceedings. Hence, sought to dismiss the petition. 6. The petitioner is the sole accused facing trial for the offence punishable under Sections 366A and 376 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short 'POCSO Act'). In the application filed under Sections 311 and 231(1) of Cr.P.C., it is stated that C.W.22/P.W.10 Dr.Saritha has examined the victim and referred her to OBG for genital examination and Dentist for age estimation and also to Psychiatry. While giving final opinion, P.W.10 has relied on OBG report and Psychiatrist report as well as on Dentist report. The said original report was found in the file of P.W.10 and in proof of victim's date of birth, her SSLC marks card (original) is also produced. It is stated that they are necessary documents to be produced for the judicious adjudication of the case. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41947 CRL.P No. 12610 of 2025 7. Learned Sessions Judge while allowing the application has observed that the documents are very much important to prove the allegations against the accused. Non-submission of the documents earlier cannot be a ground to reject the application since the documents are relevant and important documents and they are required to be marked as exhibits. Learned Sessions Judge further observed that opportunity will be given to the accused for cross-examination on those documents. 8. The Court conducting trial in exercise of its power vested under Sections 231 and 311 of Cr.P.C., for the just decision of the case can allow the application considering the relevancy of the documents which the prosecution or the accused intends to produce and examine the witnesses. 9. The petitioner has got ample opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses on the documents which the prosecution intends to produce and rely. The Trial Court shall enable the defence by giving sufficient opportunity to - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41947 CRL.P No. 12610 of 2025 cross-examine the witnesses on the documents now the prosecution intends to produce and mark in evidence. 10. With the above observation, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. 11. In view of the disposal of the main petition, pending interlocutory applications are also disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14