S.NAGARATHNA vs H.M.NAGENDRAPPA,
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59468
CRL.P No. 11005 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010505792026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 27 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11005 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
S.NAGARATHNA
W/O R. SHIVANNA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
PROPRIETOR OF SHREE PANDURANGA SWAMY
TRADERS, APMC YARD, E AND F BLOCK,
CHITRADURGA - 577 501
RESIDING AT KOUSTUBHA NILAYA,
12TH CROSS, DAVALAGIRI, BADAVANE,
2ND STAGE, OPPOSITE, H.P PETROL BANK,
BHEEMASAMUDRA, ROAD, CHITRADURGA CITY,
CHITRADURGA - 577 501
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. JAGAN MOHAN M.T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
H.M. NAGENDRAPPA,
S/O LATE MAHESHWARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
OCCUPATION AGRICULTURIST
RESIDING AT KOGUNDE VILLAGE,
BHARAMASAGARA HOBALI,
CHITRADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. KALLESHAPPA K.S., ADVOCATE (ABSENT))
Digitally Signed by ANANT
RAMNATH HEGDE
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59468
CRL.P No. 11005 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010505792026
THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 (FILED U/S.528 BNSS)
CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.07.2026 IN
C.C.NO.2129/2021 PASSED BY THE I ADDL CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC COURT AT CHITRADURGA ON APPLICATION FILED U/S.91
OF CRPC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
Respondent No.2 though served is not present before the
Court.
2. This petition is filed challenging the order passed by
the Trial Court rejecting the application filed by the
petitioner/accused invoking Section 91 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973.
3. In a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 ('NI Act'), the petitioner/accused filed an
application to summon the IT returns of the complainant from
Digitally Signed by ANANT
RAMNATH HEGDE
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59468
CRL.P No. 11005 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010505792026
2020 to 2022 and also the Pan card, the statement of bank
account of the complainant from 2020 to 2022 in addition to
the pass book and account statement of the complainant from
the banks in which the complainant has account. The
documents are sought from the year 2020 till the date of filing
the complaint.
4. The application is also filed to secure the property
records in the name of the complainant and his wife. The said
application was objected by the complainant. The Trial Court
accepted the objection and the application is rejected.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
amount mentioned in the cheque is Rs.5,20,000/-. The
complaint is filed on the allegation that the complainant had
lent Rs.5,00,000/- in cash as hand loan to the petitioner.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
the petitioner has disputed the financial capacity of the
complainant to advance Rs.5,00,000/- as hand loan. Thus, it is
the contention that to substantiate the defence taken, the
Digitally Signed by ANANT
RAMNATH HEGDE
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59468
CRL.P No. 11005 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010505792026
documents mentioned in the application are required and the
Trial Court could not have rejected the application.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
proceeding under Section 138 of the NI Act there is a
presumption in favour of the complainant/respondent and the
burden is on the petitioner/accused. Thus, to discharge the
burden, those documents are very much required.
8. The Court has considered the contentions raised and
perused the records.
9. From the impugned order passed by the Trial Court, it
is noticed that the application rejected by referring to the
judgment of the Apex Court in the case of John K. Abraham
1
V. Simon C. Abraham and Another . The Trial Court has
come to the conclusion that the complainant has to prove his
case and accused cannot direct the complainant to act in a
particular manner.
10. The Trial Court has also come to the conclusion that
whether the complainant has paid the income tax or not is not
1
(2014) 2 SCC 236
Digitally Signed by ANANT
RAMNATH HEGDE
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59468
CRL.P No. 11005 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010505792026
the matter to be considered by the Trial Court. The Court has
also held that not filing income tax return would not
automatically mean that the complainant had no source of
income to advance the loan as alleged. The Trial Court has also
observed that non-payment of income tax is a matter between
the revenue and assessee and no adverse inference can be
drawn in this regard only because of income tax return is not
filed.
11. What is required to be noticed from the impugned
order is that the Trial Court has not made any reference to the
other documents sought to be summoned by the petitioner/
accused. The petitioner/accused has also made a prayer to
secure the bank statement as well as the property records.
12. It is relevant to notice that in the statement of
objection the petitioner has produced the RTC. The petitioner
has referred to the RTC bearing Survey No.46/2 measuring 03
acres 17 guntas, 42/2 measuring 30 guntas, Survey No.42/1
measuring 02 acres 19 guntas, Survey No.97/4 measuring 03
acres 05 guntas, and Sy.No.6/2 measuring 09 acres 18 guntas.
Digitally Signed by ANANT
RAMNATH HEGDE
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59468
CRL.P No. 11005 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010505792026
In other words, complainant has no objection to refer to the
said records, though the documents are the xerox copies.
13. The Court is of the view that the petitioner's
application to summon the bank statement of the complainant
cannot be said to be untenable in law given the fact that the
accused has to discharge the burden which is cast on him
because of the presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of the
NI Act.
14. Under the circumstances, impugned order is set
aside partly.
15. Hence the following:
ORDER
i. Criminal Petition is allowed in part .
ii. Impugned order dated 07.07.2026 in
C.C.No.2129/2021 is partly set aside.
iii. The respondent / complainant shall produce the
bank statement of his bank accounts before the
Trial Court.
Digitally Signed by ANANT
RAMNATH HEGDE
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59468
CRL.P No. 11005 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010505792026
iv. In case the petitioner / accused disputes the
correctness of the xerox copies of the property
records, the respondent shall also produce the
certified copies of the same.
v. It is made clear that this Court has not
expressed anything on the merits of the
complaint.
Digitally Signed by ANANT
RAMNATH HEGDE
(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
JUDGE
NMS
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 44