Sri Rajesh Shetty vs Sri. Hussainabba
2025 Latest Caselaw 10418 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Sri Rajesh Shetty vs Sri. Hussainabba on 19 November, 2025

Author: Mohammad Nawaz

Bench: Mohammad Nawaz

                                            -1-
                                                        NC: 2025:KHC:47751
                                                  CRL.P No. 14424 of 2025


               HC-KAR




               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                  DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
                                         BEFORE
                  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
                        CRIMINAL PETITION NO.14424 OF 2025
                              (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))

               BETWEEN:

               SRI RAJESH SHETTY
               S/O SHEENAPPA SHETTY,
               AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
               RESIDING AT ARADHYA,
               NEAR ADHIMAYE TEMPLE ROAD,
               JEPPINAMOGERU-575 007
               MANGALURU TALUK, D.K.
                                                               ...PETITIONER
               (BY SRI. HARISH N.R., ADVOCATE)

               AND:

               SRI. HUSSAINABBA
               S/O LATE AHMED BAVA,
               AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
               RESIDING AT NAZIYA MANZIL
Digitally
signed by      NEAR GANDHI MAIDAN,
LAKSHMI T
Location:
               KARNAD-574 154
High Court     MULKI, D.K. DISTRICT.
of Karnataka
                                                             ...RESPONDENT

                    THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS)
               BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
               THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
               JUDGE, D.K. MANGALURU IN CRL.R.P.326/2022 DATED 11.08.2025
               CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. JMFC, IX COURT,
               MANGALURU IN CC.NO.802/2018 DATED 27.10.2022 AND ALLOW
               THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER U/S. 45 OF INDIAN
               EVIDENCE ACT.

                   THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
               ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
                               -2-
                                           NC: 2025:KHC:47751
                                     CRL.P No. 14424 of 2025


HC-KAR




CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ


                        ORAL ORDER

Petitioner is seeking to set aside the order passed by

the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K.,

Mangalore in Crl.RP.No.326/2022 dated 11.08.2025 and

the order passed by the learned JMFC IX Court, Mangaluru

in C.C.No.802/2018 dated 27.10.2022.

2. By the aforesaid orders, the application filed by

the petitioner/accused under Section 45 of the Indian

Evidence Act and Section 293 (2) of Cr.P.C has been

rejected.

3. The respondent herein initiated a proceeding

against the petitioner alleging an offence punishable under

Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in respect of a

cheque allegedly issued by the petitioner for a sum of

Rs.43,00,000/- in discharge of a legally enforceable debt.

NC: 2025:KHC:47751

HC-KAR

4. The complaint was filed in the year 2018. The

proceedings are pending in C.C.No.802/2018 before the

Court of the learned JMFC IX Court, Mangaluru.

5. The application is filed to refer the cheque-

Ex.P1 to expert opinion to verify the correction found in

the said cheque and to compare the same with Ex.D1 i.e.,

the agreement alleged to have been executed by the

accused and a person by name Rajesh Jain.

6. It is the contention of the learned counsel for

the petitioner that the said lease agreement at Ex.D1

refers to three cheques and the cheque number which is

the subject matter in the present case is also mentioned

which is dated 10.01.2015, for a sum of Rs.7,00,000/-. He

therefore contended that the said cheque has been

misused by the complainant by correcting the date and

inserting Rs.43,00,000/-.

7. The petitioner had though disputed that the

check in question is not issued to the complainant and that

NC: 2025:KHC:47751

HC-KAR

there is correction made in the cheque etc., the said

contention was not taken till the application was filed

under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act in the year

2022 i.e., at the fag end of the proceedings before the

Trial Court. It is submitted by the learned counsel that

during the cross-examination of PW1, since he denied the

suggestion put to him, he was constrained to file the said

application.

8. The learned Magistrate while rejecting the

application has observed that at the stage of recording of

313 Cr.P.C statement of the accused, the accused has filed

the said application and as per the endorsement, the

Ex.P1 was returned for 'Funds Insufficient'. It is observed

that it is not mandatory for the drawer to fill up the entire

instrument by himself if the accused has not disputed his

signature found in the cheque in question and it is not a

sufficient ground to send Ex.P1 to compare with Ex.D1.

NC: 2025:KHC:47751

HC-KAR

9. Learned Sessions Judge while confirming the

order passed by the learned Magistrate has observed that

the Court can ascertain the evidence during judgment and

give findings. If the defence of the accused is proved, the

Court can take the same and give findings regarding

material alteration of the cheque and decide the matter in

accordance with law.

10. This Court finds no error in the orders passed

by the Courts below.

11. Petition is dismissed.

All the contentions of the parties are kept open.

I.A.No.1/25 is disposed of.

Sd/-

(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

NC CT:bms