Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 42937 (KAR)

SMT. LATHA PRASAD v. M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LTD

WP/2330/2024 · 2026-09-23

V Srishananda

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010027392024 NC: 2026:KHC:52717 WP No. 2330 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA WRIT PETITION NO. 2330 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. LATHA PRASAD W/O SARAVANA PRASAD AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO.22/131 F BLOCK , BDA, MIG FLATS, DOMLUR 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 037. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIVEKANANDA N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. LINGARAJ SHARANAPPA.,ADVOCATES) AND: M/S RAJESH EXPORTS LTD., NO.4, BATAVIA CHAMBERS KUMARA KRUPA ROAD, KUMARA PARK EAST, BANGALORE 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY R M NANJUNDASWAMY. GOLD BUSINESS COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANY ACT. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAJU P.,ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010027392024 NC: 2026:KHC:52717 WP No. 2330 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SETTING ASIDE ORDER DATED 30/10/2023 PASSED BY LXI ADDL. CITY AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH 62) AT BENGALURU IN CRL. A. NO.969/2017 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 16/09/2022 UNDER SECTION 391 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Vivekananda N., learned Counsel for the petitioner appearing on behalf of Sri Lingaraj Sharanappa, counsel for the petitioner. 2. This Court had heard the arguments of the petitioner and granted time to the respondent to address the arguments. Despite granting sufficient time respondent has failed to appear before the Court and address the arguments. 3. Petition is filed with the following prayer: - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010027392024 NC: 2026:KHC:52717 WP No. 2330 of 2024 “WHEREFORE, the Petitioner humbly pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased: a. Issue a writ of certiorari setting aside order dated 30/10/2023 passed by LXI Additional City and Sessions Judge (CCH 62) at Bengaluru in Crl. A. No. 969/2017 produced at Annexure-A and allow the application filed by the petitioner dated 16/09/2022 under section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 produced at Annexure-A in the interest of Justice. b. Pass such other appropriate order/s as deemed fit to pass under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” 4. Taking note of the fact that the additional evidence that is sought to be placed on record before the First Appellate Court is a necessary document to be considered by the First Appellate Court in accordance with law, rejection of the application has resulted in miscarriage of justice. 5. Accordingly, a case is made out by the petitioner to place the judgment of C.C.No.30140/2014 on record as an additional evidence which admittedly was not available to the petitioner when the trial went on before the Trial Court. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010027392024 NC: 2026:KHC:52717 WP No. 2330 of 2024 6. As such, following: ORDER (i) Petition is allowed. (ii) Impugned order dated 30.10.2023 passed by the learned LXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-62) is hereby set aside. (iii) Application filed by the petitioner before the First Appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No.969/2017 under Section 391 of Code of Criminal Procedure is hereby allowed subject to payment of cost Rs.5,000/- to the respondent/complainant. (iv) Learned judge in the First Appellate Court however is at liberty to appreciate the veracity and probative value of the additional evidence and allowing this petition by this Court - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010027392024 NC: 2026:KHC:52717 WP No. 2330 of 2024 shall not be construed that this Court has accepted the probative value of the additional documents. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67