Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/1432/2026 of SHRI RIYAZ T V Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 22 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010065672026 NC: 2026:KHC:52138 CRL.P No. 1432 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1432 OF 2026 BETWEEN: SHRI. RIYAZ T.V, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, S/O
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1432 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
SHRI. RIYAZ T.V,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
S/O ABDUL RAHIMAN,
AYISHA HOME NEEDS,
16TH MAIN, 7TH CROSS,
BTM 2ND STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 076.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ASHOKA T, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MICO LAYOUT POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY THE SPP,
HIGH COURT COMPLEX,
BENGALURU - 560 009.
C.S VENKATESH
S/O SHRINIVASA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/AT NO.966, 8TH CROSS,
16TH MAIN, BTM 2ND STAGE,
BENGALURU CITY - 560 076
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. NAGHARISH G.S, HCGP FOR R1)
HC-KAR
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528
BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 27.03.2024
(AT ANNEXURE-A IN SPL.C.NO. 1626/2023 FOR THE OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 8 OR THE PROTECTION OF
CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012 PENDING ON
THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CITY AND CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE (FTSC-I) AT BENGALURU AND PASS ON ORDER TO RE- OPEN THE STAGE OF CROSS- EXAMINATION PW-1 (CW-1, SHRI C.S.VENKATESH - FATHER OF THE ALLEGED VICTIM), PW-2 (CW-2, MISS NIRANJANI - THE ALLEGE VICTIM), PW-3
(CW-3, SMT. ANITHA), AND PW-9 (CW-16, SMT. SAROJINI
WAGHMARE - PSI) AND PERMIT THE ACCUSED FOR FURTHER
CROSS EXAMINATION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent.
2. The application filed by the petitioner to recall PW1 to 3 and 9 for cross examination is rejected by the Special Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 in Spl.C.No.1626/2023.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the accused/petitioner has engaged a different counsel, as the previous counsel retired and when the matter was briefed
HC-KAR
to the new counsel, the new counsel suggested that application has to be filed to put some vital questions to the witnesses referred to above. However, the application is rejected on the ground that in a case of this nature, the victim cannot be made to attend the Court often.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader would oppose the petition on the ground that the Special Court is justified in rejecting the application, as the Special Court has taken note of the requirement of Section 33(5) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO), 2012.
5. The Court has considered the contentions raised and perused the records.
6. It is indeed true that the aforementioned provision puts an obligation on the special Court to ensure that the victim does not appear before the special Court often and again.
7. The Court has also considered the nature of the allegations made in this case. Since the petitioner will have to
HC-KAR
undergo imprisonment in case of conviction, considering the nature of the punishment, to ensure complete justice, the Court is of the view that the petition has to be allowed-in-part.
8. The petitioner shall pay cost of Rs.5,000/- to the victim by the next date of hearing.
9. The petitioner shall not seek any further adjournment when the case is fixed for cross-examination and petitioner is permitted to cross-examine only PW2 and PW9.
10. It is also made clear that there shall not be any questions on the matters, over which there is already cross- examination. The petitioner is only permitted to cross examine the witnesses on the matter, which is not covered in the earlier cross-examination.
(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE
JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10