- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2464 CRL.P No. 15248 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 15248 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI VENKATESH D. R., @ VENKI S/O LATE RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS R/AT BASAPPANAPALYA VILLAGE KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 572 123 PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT DIMBADALLI VILLAGE KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT – 562 117 PETITIONER IN JC FROM 25.03.2023. …PETITIONER (BY SRI MAHENDRA G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KAGGALIPURA POLICE STATION BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT – 560 116 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2464 CRL.P No. 15248 of 2025 2. SRI SHIVANANDA S/O SANGAMESH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.36, HONNAGIRI BUILDING OPP. POST OFFICE, AGARA ROAD TATAGUNI, KENGERI HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 082. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 25.01.2025 IN SPL.C.NO.583/2023, FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 376(A), 304 OF IPC, 1860, U/S 4 AND 6 OF POCSO ACT, 2012, PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-II, BENGALURU RURAL, BENGALURU, VIDE ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri.Mahendra G, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.B.N.Jagadeesha, learned Addl. SPP appearing for respondent No.1-State and have perused the material on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2464 CRL.P No. 15248 of 2025 2. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question rejection of an application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. 3. The petitioner is an accused in Spl. Case No.583/2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376(A), 304 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and under Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 4. The issue in the lis does not pertain to merit of the matter. The petitioner files an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. The concerned Court on the score that it is an application second in line. The application comes to be rejected by the following order: "This application is filed on behalf of the accused to recall P.W.11, P.W.12, P.W.13, P.W.26, P.W.27, P.W.28, P.W.29, P.W.30 and P.W.31 for cross examination. Learned SPP filed statement of objections. Heard. As per the application the present application is filed as per the order of this court. However this. court has neither directed nor ordered the applicant for filing the present application. It is the wish of any party to the proceedings to file any application of their choice for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2464 CRL.P No. 15248 of 2025 defending their case. The court has noting to do with filing of the application. Be that as it may. In this case cross examination of P.Ws.11, 12 and 13 was taken as nil on 17.01.2024. The learned counsel for the accused then on record filed an application on 18.05.2024 to recall C.W.s 1 to 3 for cross examination. In the said application the P.W.s 11 to 13 were not sought for recalling for cross examination. Subsequently the learned counsel for the accused remained absent as such cross examination of P.W.s 26 to 31 was taken as nil. That as submitted by the learned Special Public Prosecutor examination of some of the witnesses has taken place at about 1 year ago and no grounds are urged for recalling the said witnesses. Therefore when all ready the matter is posted for arguments on merits and when evidence of some of the witnesses was recorded a year ago, no good grounds are made out for recalling the witnesses. Therefore the following; ORDER The application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C is rejected." 5. A perusal at the order impugned would indicate that it comes to be rejected on the score that one year ago the cross-examination of those witnesses or some of the witnesses had taken place and therefore, there was no warrant for allowing the application seeking recall of the said witnesses. The petitioner is facing charges that could lead to punishment, which would run for more than ten years and therefore, it is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2464 CRL.P No. 15248 of 2025 necessary for the accused to get all opportunity to prove his defence. That is the purport of Section 311 of Cr.P.C. 6. In that light, I deem it appropriate to grant the petitioner one opportunity to cross-examine all those witnesses whom the petitioner is wanting to cross-examine through his application and that shall not become a ruse to drag the proceedings any further. The concerned Court shall oversee that the proceedings should not be dragged on the said score. 7. With the aforesaid observation and for the aforesaid reasons, the following: O R D E R [I] Criminal Petition is allowed. [II] Proceedings in Spl.Case No.583/2023 pending before the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, FTSC- II, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, qua the petitioner stands quashed. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2464 CRL.P No. 15248 of 2025 [III] The application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., is allowed. The petitioner shall be permitted to cross- examine those witnesses sought in the application bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CBC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41 CT:SS