Accused Entitled to Cross-Examine Witness to Meet Ends of Justice: Karnataka HC

In a crucial intervention upholding fair trial rights, the High Court of Karnataka has held that an accused must be granted a final opportunity to cross-examine a key prosecution witness to meet the ends of justice, even if previous opportunities were defaulted upon.

A single-judge bench comprising Justice M.I.Arun was hearing a criminal petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 challenging a trial court order that had closed the cross-examination of the Investigating Officer as 'nil'.

Court Observations and Directions

The High Court reviewed the trial court's order and noted that while the lower court was not technically in error given the petitioner's prior defaults, a final indulgence was warranted to ensure a fair trial.

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "As the petitioner herein failed to cross examine PW.11 in spite of being granted sufficient opportunity, the impugned order has been passed. Hence, I do not see any error in the same. However, to meet the ends of justice, I am of the opinion that the petitioner should be granted one last opportunity to cross examine PW.11."

The Court issued the following directions:

"(i) The impugned order dated 20.06.2026 passed by VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, insofar as it relates to refusing permission to the petitioner to cross examine PW.11 in Spl.C.No.41/2021, is hereby set aside;
(ii) The trial court is directed to afford one last opportunity to the petitioner to cross examine PW.11, subject to the petitioner paying a cost of `.10,000/- to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru;
(iii) The petitioner shall co-operate for expeditious disposal of the case before the trial court and shall not pray for any adjournment;
(iv) The Criminal Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of."

Background

The dispute arose out of proceedings in Spl.C.No.41/2021 pending before the VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, involving offences punishable under Sections 7(a), 7A, and 12 of the Prevention Of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018. The petitioner, arrayed as Accused No. 2, failed to cross-examine PW-11 (the Investigating Officer) despite the witness being recalled on a previous order subject to costs.

On June 20, 2026, when PW-11 was present through video conferencing, the counsel for the petitioner remained absent, and a proxy counsel sought an adjournment without depositing the previously ordered costs or assigning valid reasons. Consequently, the trial court rejected the application under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, recorded the cross-examination of PW-11 as 'nil', and declared the evidence proceedings completed.

Aggrieved by the closure of cross-examination, the petitioner approached the High Court seeking one final opportunity. The High Court, while validating the trial court's view on the petitioner's lapse, set aside the restrictive part of the order in the interest of justice, subject to payment of Rs. 10,000/- as costs to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority.

Case Details:
Case No.: Criminal Petition No. 9760 of 2026
Neutral Citation: 2026:KHC:46575
Case Title: Sharana Kumar v. Karnataka Lokayukta and Anr.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Sri. Brijesh Patil, Advocate
For the Respondent(s): Sri. Venkatesh S. Arabatti, Advocate for R-1

Source: 2026 CaseBase(KAR) 15829