IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. JAGANNATHAN CRL.P.NO. 10359/2011 Between: Sri.Siddappa S/ o.Lagamappa Karegar, Aged about years, 0cc.: Business, R/o.Betageri, Tq.: Gokak, Dist.: Belgaum. Petitioner (By Sri.K,Anandkumar, Advocate) And: Aladhalli S/o.Javanegouda Rajanna, Age Major, 0cc.: Contractor, Taluka Gokak, District Belgaum. Respondent This Criminal petition is filed u/S. 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to set aside the order dated 18.11.2010 passed by the Pri. Sessions Judge, Belgaum in Crl.R.P.No.454/2010 and also set aside the judgment dated 30.09.210 passed by the Prl. JMFC Court, Gokak in C.C,No. 1154/2000 dismissing the application filed by the petitioner herein u/S. 311 of Cr.P,C. filed on 17.09.2007 with cost of1,000/- to the petitioner. This petition coming on for admission this day, the Court made the following: -2- ORDER Heard the petitioner’s counsel in respect of the chaflenge to the order passed by the trial Court dismissing the application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. and revisional Court confirmed the trial Court order by dismissing the revision filed by the petitioner. 2. The petitioner’s grievance is that, in respect of the 138 of N.I. Act proceedings the petitioner filed an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C praying that directions be issued to the complainant to produce accounts books from 1998 onwards up to date of filing of complaint to fmd out whether the revision petitioner was actually due to pay Z1 ,95,000/ - to the complainant. The said petition was dismissed by the trial Court and revisional Court dismissed the petition on the ground of petition being not maintainable as the order passed is an interlocutory order. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Courts below committed an error in not allowing the application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. Having gone through the order, I do not find any error being committed by -3- the trial Court while dismissing the application filed under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. nohe revisional Courtorder, as the order passed by the trial Court was on an interlocutory application. 4. Though this petition is maintainable under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, however I do not see any merit in this petition. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Sd! Vnp* IUDGE