- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32169 CRL.P No. 11518 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11518 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SMT. HASSANABI W/O T.B. VENKATESH @ T.B. VENKATASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, WORKING AS A TEACHER, R/O NO.1966/24, 2ND MAIN, 9TH CROSS, 'A' BLOCK, S.S. BADAVANE, DAVANAGERE CITY - 577 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.R. HIREMATHAD, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. SHIVAKUMAR T.R, M/S KEERTHI PRINTERS SOLUTION, ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR, S/O T.N. REVANASIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O NO.580/2, "DHRUVA NILAYA", SANKOLLI SHIVAPPA BADAVANE, NEAR RASTHA DABA, SHAMANURU, DAVANAGERE - 577 004. …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482(FILED U/S.528 BNSS) OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASHING OF THE ORDER DATED 09.01.2025 ON THE APPLICATION U/S.311 OF CR.P.C PASSED Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32169 CRL.P No. 11518 of 2025 BY THE II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT DAVANAGERE IN C.C.NO.2091/2019 THEREBY DIRECTING ALLOW THE TRIAL COURT TO PASS AN ORDER FOR RECALLING PW 1 FOR CROSS EXAMINATION AND FOR PASSING OF SUCH OTHER APPROPRIATE ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed the petitioner/accused questioning the order passed by the learned Magistrate on an application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the record. 3. The present petition arises out of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The record would indicate that the petitioner/accused, having failed to cross-examine the complainant, moved an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32169 CRL.P No. 11518 of 2025 Procedure on 15.07.2024. The said application came to be rejected by the learned Magistrate vide order dated 05.07.2024, and the matter was thereafter posted for defence evidence on 08.07.2024. 4. Instead of availing the remedy of challenging the order dated 05.07.2024, the petitioner/accused again chose to file a second application under Section 311 of the Code seeking permission to cross-examine the complainant. The learned Magistrate, noting that an identical application had already been considered and rejected on 05.07.2024, dismissed the subsequent application on the ground of maintainability. 5. Upon perusal of the order impugned, this Court finds no infirmity in the reasoning assigned by the learned Magistrate. Once the petitioner/accused had suffered an adverse order on 05.07.2024, the appropriate course open to him was to challenge the said order before a competent forum. Having failed to do so, the petitioner could not - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32169 CRL.P No. 11518 of 2025 have invoked the same provision a second time, seeking identical relief. The learned Magistrate, therefore, was fully justified in rejecting the second application, and the impugned order does not disclose any illegality or irregularity warranting interference by this Court. Accordingly, the criminal petition stands dismissed. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37 CT: BHK