- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22037 CRL.P No. 4463 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 4438 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4463 OF 2026 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4438 OF 2026 IN CRL.P No. 4463/2026 BETWEEN: SRI SANDESH B. R., AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O LATE B.L.RAMANNA R/AT NO. 18, “SRI RAM NILAYA” 19TH CROSS, NEAR HOTEL GEO SAMPANGI RAMANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 027. …PETITIONER (BY SRI ANAND K., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI M.N.RANGANNA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS S/O LATE NARASIMHARAJA SHETTY R/AT NO. 1/2/40, 7TH MAIN ROAD 19TH CROSS, SAMPANGI RAMANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 027. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI H.M.GIRISHA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22037 CRL.P No. 4463 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 4438 of 2026 THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT CRIMINAL PETITION AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 25.02.2026 PASSED BY THE COURT OF XII ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, AT BENGALURU. IN C.C. NO. 11335/2023 (ARISING OUT OF PCR NO. 3464/2023). IN CRL.P NO. 4438/2026 BETWEEN: SRI SANDESH B. R., AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O LATE B.L.RAMANNA R/AT NO. 18, “SRI RAM NILAYA” 19TH CROSS, NEAR HOTEL GEO SAMPANGI RAMANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 027. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI ANAND K., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI M.N.RANGANNA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS S/O LATE NARASIMHARAJA SHETTY R/AT NO. 1/2/40, 7TH MAIN ROAD 19TH CROSS, SAMPANGI RAMANAGAR BENGALURU - 560 027. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI H.M.GIRISHA, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT CRL.P AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 25.02.2026 PASSED BY THE COURT OF XII ACJM, AT BENGALURU IN CC.NO.11335/2023 ARISING OUT OF PCR.NO.3464/2023. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22037 CRL.P No. 4463 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 4438 of 2026 THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Anand K, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri H M Girisha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. Parties to the lis are common in both these cases. Therefore, the two are taken up together and considered by this common order. The transaction between the two leads to issuance of cheques. The cheques having been dishonoured leads the complainant to the concerned Court, which is now pending as CC No.11335 of 2023. 3. The issue in the lis is not with regard to the merit of the matter. Merit, I mean, the contention of the accused or the complainant as the case would be. What leads the accused/petitioner to this Court in these petitions is rejection of the applications filed under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C. seeking - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22037 CRL.P No. 4463 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 4438 of 2026 summoning of the Manager, State Bank of India along with certain documents before the Court. The said applications come to be rejected, therefore the accused is before the Court. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused would vehemently contend that the concerned Court has not considered the submissions of the counsel, as the complainant himself had no objection to summon those cheques. It is only a ruse to drag the proceedings for the reasons rendered by the concerned Court, which should not be accepted is his submission. 5. The learned counsel for the complainant would admit the fact that in the cross-examination he had no objection for calling the two cheques or for examination of the Branch Manager. All these factors have not been looked into by the concerned Court while rejecting the applications. 6. The applications filed under Section 91 of the Cr.P.C. are rejected by a very perfunctory order bearing no reasons. In that light, the concerned Court will have to now reconsider the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22037 CRL.P No. 4463 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 4438 of 2026 applications filed under Section 91 of Cr.P.C., bearing in mind the submissions and contra submissions that are now projected, which are already in the petition and the objections filed by the petitioner and the respondent’s counsel. For the reason that no cogent reasons are rendered to reject the applications, the subject petitions deserve to succeed, albeit in part. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) Criminal Petitions are allowed. (ii) Impugned order dated 25-02-2026 passed by the XII Additional Chief Judicial magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.11335 of 2023 stand quashed. (iii) The matters are remitted back to the concerned Court, to bear in mind the observations made in the course of the order and pass necessary orders on the applications afresh. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22037 CRL.P No. 4463 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 4438 of 2026 (iv) In the light of the issue being 3 years old, I further deem it appropriate to infuse finality into the proceedings to direct the concerned Court to conclude the proceedings within an outer limit of 6 months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. (v) It is needless to observe that the concerned Court shall not permit the parties to the lis to drag the proceedings on any ground whatsoever. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 33