Sri. Veerabhadraiah vs. Sri. A. R. Umesh - Karnataka High Court, 30 October 2025

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43322 CRL.P No. 5225 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5225 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SRI. VEERABHADRAIAH S/O LATE LINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, PROP VLR POULTRY FARM, MADHUGIRI ROAD, NARASIPURA VILLAGE, BELADARA POST, KORA HOBLI, TUMKUR DISTRICT. 572 106. ANOTHER ADDRESS SRI VEERABHADRAIAH S/O LATE LINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, SRI VEERABHADRASHWARA NIALYA TG3473, 1ST CROSS, BESIDE INDIA GRANITE SHOP VASAVI NAGARA, OPP. D.C. BUNGLOW, TUMKUR - 572 106 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GOPALA KRISHNA B N., ADVOCATE (P/H)) AND: SRI. A. R. UMESH S/O ALUR BASAPPA Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43322 CRL.P No. 5225 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, PROP M.B. ENTERPRISES, MERCHANTS AND COMMISSION AGENT NO.238, MELLEKATTE, HAVING THE OFFICE AT NO. 1214/64/B APMC YARD, A BLOCK, DAVANAGERE - 577 002. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAKASHA H.C., ADVOCATE (P/H)) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 (FILED U/S.528 BNSS) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17.02.2025 ON THE APPLICATION U/S.91 OF CRPC PASSED BY THE Ist ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DAVANAGERE IN C.C.NO.708/2021 THAT IS ANNEXURE A AND ALLOW THE SAME. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

ORAL ORDER

The instant petition arises out of proceeding initiated by the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43322

The petitioner/accused is aggrieved by the order passed by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Davangere, rejecting his application filed under Section 91 of Cr.P.C, wherein a direction was sought to the complainant to produce the documents mentioned below;

To produce IT returns from 2019 up to the 2022 of the complainant.

To produce the PAN card of the complainant.

To produce the Balance sheet of the entire bank account in the complainant from 2019 to 2022

To produce the Bank pass book or Account statement of the complainant of all the Banks from 23-11-2019 up to the date of filing of the complaint and on the date of evidence of the complainant.

To produce entire properties documents of the complainant and his wife.

To produce the entire agricultural lands, sites, houses, and all property sale deed documents in the name of the complainant.

To produce the VAT and GST certificate of the business.

To produce the Maize business license.

To produce audit report 2019-2022. 10. Received slip to the accused. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43322

The complaint was filed on 16.03.2021. The complainant was examined as PW1. 35 documents were produced and marked as Exs.P1 to P35. The material on record shows that from 2021 the case was posted for cross-examination of PW1, at the request of the defence. It is seen that till 19.08.2023, the defence did not cross - examine PW1. Thereafter, on 19.08.2023 the case was referred to Lok-adalath as it was submitted by the accused that the matter would be settled. Time was taken till 16.01.2024. However, the accused never came forward to settle the matter. The matter was again posted to 06.02.2024 for cross-examination of PW1. Even on that day, PW1 was not cross-examined. Therefore, the trial Court having no other option took the cross-examination of PW1 as nil and posted the matter to 22.02.2024 for recording the statement of the accused. At that stage, the accused filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. On the next date, as the accused remained absent, NBW was issued which was recalled. The application filed under HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43322 Section 311 Cr.P.C came to be allowed. However, in spite of that, the accused did not cross-examine the complainant till 13.08.2024. Later, PW1 was cross- examined in part on 09.09.2024 and 08.10.2024. Again the accused did not cross-examine PW1 when the matter was listed again, even though the complainant was present. Cross-examination of PW1 was allowed by imposing costs and the matter was posted to 23.11.2024. But said day PW1 was not cross-examined.

The learned Magistrate taking into consideration that the accused was filing application after application and prolonging the matter and abusing the process of the Court, has dismissed the application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C.

This is a proceeding initiated against the respondent alleging an offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the defence wants to HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43322 challenge the financial capacity of the complainant. The learned Magistrate has made an observation that proving the financial capacity is the burden of the complainant and therefore, it is not necessary to give any direction to the complainant bank to produce the documents mentioned in the application.

This court does not find any error in the order passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing the application filed under Section 91 Cr.P.C. There is no merit in this petition. Petition is dismissed. Consequently, I.A.No.2/2025 is disposed of.

The learned magistrate shall proceed further in accordance with law and conclude the matter as expeditiously as possible. (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

KLY CT: JL