W.P.No.56974/2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JULY 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

WRIT PETITION No.56974/2018 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

M/S.TRISHLA MINERALS

I FLOOR, ABOVE INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK

LANDLINKS TOWNSHIP

DEREBAIL, KONCHADY

MANGALORE- 57

REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR

SRI KRISHNARAJA MAYYA

&PETITIONER

(BY SRI P.P.HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

AND:

M/S.CHAMPIONS

A PARTNERSHIP FIRM

REP. BY ITS PARTNER

SRI UMASHANKAR REDDY

HAVING ITS OFFICE AT

NO.1048, 20^TH MAIN ROAD

RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU- 560 010

&RESPONDENT

(BY SRI RAVI L.VAIDYA, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH

SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDERS

DATED

06.10.2018

(ANNEXURE-A)

AND

20.11.2018

(ANNEXURE-B)

PASSED

BY

XX

ADDITIONAL

CHIEF

METROPOLITAN

MAGISTRATE,

BENGALURU

ON

THE

APPLICATIONS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 91 & 311 OF CR.P.C

AND

SECTION

311

OF

CR.P.C.

RESPECTIVELY

IN

C.C.NO.9472/2014 ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER

HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.No.56974/2018

2

O R D E R

In this petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of

the

orders

dated

06.10.2018

(Annexure-A)

and

20.11.2018 (Annexure-B) passed by XX Additional Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.9472/2014.

By the impugned orders, the learned Magistrate rejected

the applications of the petitioner as per Annexures-J and

K.

2.

Under

Annexure-J

the

application

under

Sections 91 and 311 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner sought

summoning the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,

Bengaluru, direct him to seize, secure and cause

production of the income tax returns along with book of

accounts, statement of accounts, audited balance sheet of

the respondent company for the years 2009-2010, 2010-

2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014.

3.

Under

Annexure-K

the

application

under

Section 311 of Cr.P.C, the petitioner sought to recall PW.1

the complainant for further cross-examination.

4.

The respondent was the complainant and the

petitioner was the accused before the trial Court. For the

W.P.No.56974/2018

3

purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred to

henceforth as per their ranks before the trial Court.

5.

The

complainant

under

the

complaint

Annexure-C sought prosecution of the accused for the

offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881 (8the Act9 for short).

6.

The gist of the complaint in brief is as follows:

The accused was trading in iron ore and on his

request, the complainant had financed to the tune of

Rs.19,96,05,000/-

under

different

memorandum

of

understandings. Towards discharge of the dues of those

transactions, the accused issued 10 cheques shown in the

complaint for various amounts. Then the accused filed PCR

No.12/2013 alleging forgery of cheques. In the conciliation

process, the accused agreed to pay Rs.18,41,33,000/-.

Towards discharge of that liability, he issued two cheques

for Rs.9,00,00,000/- and Rs.9,38,83,000/- respectively.

When the cheques were presented they were returned

with endorsement 8payment stopped9. Therefore the

statutory notice was issued calling upon the accused to

pay the said amount for which the accused issued frivolous

W.P.No.56974/2018

4

reply. Thus he sought prosecution of the accused for the

offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act.

7.

The trial Court on taking cognizance of the

offence, registered the case in C.C.No.9472/2014. After

the evidence of the complainant and the accused were

over on 26.09.2018, the accused filed application to

summon the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax,

Bengaluru for search, seizure and production of the income

tax returns with book of accounts, statement of accounts

etc as aforesaid from the custody of the complainant. That

application was contested by the complainant.

8.