Mr N S Rajesh vs M/S Panchajanya Textiles
2021 Latest Caselaw 5398 Kant

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 03 R D DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                                BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

       CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8461 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

Mr. N.S.Rajesh,
Aged about 49 years,
S/o K.N.Nag ab hushana Setty,
No.252, Hema Enclave,
2 n d Floor, S.F.-03
3 r d Main, 3 r d Cross,
Chamarajap et, Bengaluru-560018.
                                                           ...Petitioner
(By Sri Balaram M.L., Advocate)

AND:

M/s. Panchajanya Textiles
No.34, Kalid asa Road ,
1 s t Main, Gandhinag ar,
Beng aluru-560009.
Represented by its Partner
Sri M.K.Suresh Bab u,
                                                         ...Respondent

      This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482
of   Cr.P.C.,    praying       to   set   aside   the    order   dated
07.01.2020           p assed   by   the   Learned       Judg e   XXVIII
A.C.M.M.,       at    Beng aluru    in    C.C.No.11035/2017        and
may kindly be pleased to allow the application filed by
the petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.
                                :: 2 ::


       This Criminal Petition coming on for admission
this d ay, the Court made the following:

                           ORDER

Heard Sri Balaram M L, learned counsel for

the petitioner at the time of admission.

2. The petitioner in this petition under

Section 482 of Cr.P.C., has challenged the order

passed by the Magistrate, rejecting his application

under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.

3. The petitioner being the accused made

an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.,

seeking summons to three witnesses, namely, (1)

The Bank Manager, Sree Charan Co-operative

Bank, Sultanpet Area Branch, Bengaluru, (2) The

Bank Manager, Canara Bank, Bengaluru City

Branch, B.V.K.Iyengar Road, Bengaluru-53 and (3)

Mr. T.N.Satish S/o Late Sri Tallam Nanjunda Setty.

4. It is the contention of the petitioner that

the cheque in question was actually not issued to :: 3 ::

the complainant. Rather, it was issued to

T.N.Satish and he misused the cheque by passing

it on to complainant/respondent. The trial Court

rejected the application giving reasons that similar

applications made by the petitioner on earlier

occasions were rejected and therefore one more

application for the same relief cannot be

entertained.

5. Whatever may be the reasons given by

the trial Court for rejection of the application, as

per the submission of the counsel for the

petitioner, the trial Court has posted the case in

C.C.No.11035/2013 for judgment. Therefore once

the case is posted for judgment, even if the

petition is entertained, no purpose will be served.

If the petitioner suffers an order of conviction and

if he prefers an appeal challenging it, he can take

up the ground of rejection of his application filed

under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., in the appeal. In :: 4 ::

these circumstances, petition does not survive for

consideration. It is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Kmv/-