Karnataka High Court
Arjuna S/O. Ganapati Chikkorde @ ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 April, 2026
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB
CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.100671 OF 2025 (C)
BETWEEN:
ARJUN S/O. GANAPATI CHIKKORDE @ CHIKKODI,
AGE: 32 YEARS,
OCC. MECHANIC,
R/O. MARATHA GALLI, TQ. GOKAK,
DIST. BELAGAVI-591307.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. BHAT GANAPATI MAHABALESHWAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA/
BY ITS C.P.I.,
VINAYAKA
GOKAK TOWN POLICE STATION,
BV
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
Digitally signed HIGH COURT, DHARWAD BENCH BUILDING,
by VINAYAKA B V DHARWAD-580011.
Date: 2026.04.22
14:34:56 +0530 ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. M.B. GUNDAWADE, ADDITIONAL SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 415(2) OF
BNSS ACT, 2023 SEEKING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND SET-ASIDE
THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 27/07/2021 IN
S.C.NO.228/2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE XII ADDL. DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI, SITTING AT GOKAK FOR AN
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 302 R/W. 149, 120(B) R/W.
302, 143, 147, 148, 324 OF IPC AND ACQUIT THE APPELLANT HEREIN
/ACCUSED NO.2 FOR CHARGES LEVELED AGAINST HIM, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB
CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT
WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MURALIDHARA PAI
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH) This Court has received the records and though the matter is listed for orders for consideration of IA No.2 of 2025, heard the appellant's counsel and also learned Addl. SPP for the respondent/State, as the co-ordinate Bench of this Court has already disposed of the appeals filed by accused No.1 and accused Nos.3 to 6 in Criminal Appeal No.100290 of 2021, connected with Criminal Appeal No.100265, 100266, 100267, 100272 and 100441 of 2021, vide judgment dated 20.07.2022, confirming the conviction and sentence and dismissing the appeals.
2. The factual matrix of the case of prosecution before the trial Court is that, on 27.07.2017, there was a quarrel between the deceased Rohit Raju Patil and also PW1 and PW2 on one part and accused No.1 and the others on the other -3- NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR part, on an issue with regard to playing of swing (jokali) during Siddheshwar Temple Festival, which led to accused No.1 filing a complaint against deceased, PW1 and PW2. Pursuant to which, PW1 and PW2 were arrested and later were released on bail, while deceased had obtained the anticipatory bail and that the said incident was the motive for commission of the offence in the instant case inasmuch as the accused were nursing ill-will against the deceased, PW1 and PW2 for they having obtained the bail and that the accused persons were following the movements of deceased, PW1 and PW2 and were staring at them whenever they saw them. That on 24.09.2017, at about 09.30 p.m., deceased, PW1 and PW2 had been to Acharya Galli to watch Dandiya dance programme. Due to rain, the said programme was cancelled. The deceased, PW1 and PW2 thereafter went to a pan shop belonging to one Ramesh-PW5 situated at Apsara Koot in front of Devi Prasad Hotel to have pan/gutka at about 10.15 p.m. Accused Nos.3, 5, 8 and 9 were near the said pan shop. Just then, a maroon colour car came from Sangolli Rayanna Circle in a high speed and stopped in front of them. Accused No.3, 5, -4- NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR 8 and 9, who were nearby the said pan shop, threw chilly powder into the eyes of the deceased. By then, accused No.1, 2, 4, 6 and 7 armed with jambe (dagger) and talwar (sword), alighted from the car and pounced on the deceased hacking him to death on the spot. When PW1 tried to rescue him, accused No.2 i.e. present appellant with an intention to kill PW1 assaulted him with talwar causing injury onto his palm. Accused No.3, 5, 8 and 9 attempted to murder of PW2 by throttling his neck and killing him. Due to the hue and cry, PW3, PW4, CW11, CW12, CW13, CW16 and other persons gathered at the spot and five of the accused went into the car, while others fled from the scene with arms they had brought. The deceased was shifted to hospital, where he was declared as dead and PW1 and PW2 were treated in the hospital. PW1 lodged his first information statement as per Ex.P1, which was registered at 01.00 a.m. on 25.07.2017. The police having conducted the investigation filed the charge sheet for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 120B, 307 and 302 read with Section 149 of IPC. Absconding charge sheet was also filed against accused No.5. Accused -5- NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR Nos.8 and 9 were juveniles. Therefore, case against them was split up. Since the accused persons pleaded not guilty, the prosecution mainly relies upon the evidence of PW1 to PW8. Subsequently on securing the accused No.5 also, case was registered in SC No.392 of 2019, which was clubbed with SC No.228 of 2018 and both the cases were taken up together, rescheduling the trial. PW1 to PW8 were examined afresh on account of taking up both the cases together and prosecution examined PW1 to PW23 and relied upon Exs.P1 to P66 and marked MO1 to MO25. The trial Judge also invoked Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and the accused have denied the incriminating evidence but did not choose to lead any defence evidence. The trial Judge having considered both oral and documentary evidence, convicted the accused persons and sentenced them. Hence, the present appeal is filed by accused No.2, subsequent to the confirmation of judgment passed against other accused persons by co-ordinate Bench of this Court referred supra.
3. The main contention of the appellant's counsel before this Court is that the trial Judge committed an error in -6- NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR considering both oral and documentary evidence, and though the prosecution mainly relies upon the evidence of PW1 to PW5 as eye witnesses, and nowhere reflects that with an intention to commit the murder of deceased, the appellant along with other accused, hatched up a plan and by using the talwar, committed death and tried to attempt to commit the murder of PW1 and PW2. The very appreciation of evidence by the trial Judge is erroneous and the evidence of PW1 is entirely different in nature and moreover, so called eye- witnesses do not support the case of the prosecution and motive is also very big piece of material against the accused and trial Judge ought to have acquitted the accused, as no sufficient material against the present accused, who has been arrayed as accused No.2.
4. Per contra, learned Addl. SPP for the respondent/State submits that this accused is also a member of an unlawful assembly and with the common object in furtherance of common object, all of them came together in a vehicle and with an intention to take away the life, inflicted injury with deadly weapons and this accused particularly -7- NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR inflicted the injury with the deadly weapon on PW1 and the evidence of the doctor also taken note of regarding nature of injury sustained by PW1 and PW2 and trial Judge has rightly appreciated the evidence available on record. It is also submitted that this Court has already considered the material available on record against all the accused and the charges levelled against this accused is also similar to that of accused Nos.1, 3 to 6 and hence, the trial Court as well as this Court with respect to other accused also properly appreciated the evidence and hence, it does not requires any interference.
5. Having heard the counsel appearing for the appellant and also the Addl. SPP for the respondent/State and also on perusal of the evidence available on record, the points that would arise for consideration of this Court are:
1) Whether the trial Court has committed an error in convicting this accused and sentencing him along with other accused persons and whether it requires interference of this Court?
2) What order?-8-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR
6. This Court and the trial Court while considering the material on record has taken note of case of homicidal death, eye-witnesses' evidence, discovery, recovery, motive and conspiracy and particularly, taking note of the evidence of doctor-PW20, who had noticed the injuries on the deceased, that there were 15 injuries and also taken note of the opinion of the said doctor, who has opined that it is due to hemorrhagic shock secondary to injury to the vital organ- heart, which is result of stab injury, hence, comes to the conclusion that it is a case of homicidal. The trial Court has also taken note of evidence of the injured witnesses as well as other eyewitnesses i.e. PW1 to PW4 and the identity of PW1 and PW2 is not in dispute and their evidence also taken note that they have sustained the injuries and PW1, PW2 and PW23 have deposed that there was drizzling on the day of the incident and also taken the note of conspicuously no suggestion is put to PW3 and PW4 about drizzling when they started walking on that day and at that place. The defence further led to show that after the hectic work, both PW3 and PW4 resort to rest and would not go for walking. It has been -9- NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR unsuccessful to strengthen such defence. Both PW3 and PW4 have stated that going for walk after lunch around 09.30 or 10.00 p.m. in the said road is their routine. PW4 in his cross- examination states that the said road leads towards Ghataprabha river and would not be busy during night hours and therefore, they used to go for walking in that direction. The trial Court also took note of, particularly, the incident which has taken place that usually they were going towards river side as their routine and hence, the very presence is not doubted and though it is contended that PW3 and PW4 have been implanted witnesses and the same was not accepted and particularly taking note of the evidence of PW1 to PW4, and PW2 is also an accused in another murder case. Similarly PW4 when he was first examined was not accused in any case as he came to the Court on summons and considering both oral and documentary evidence on eyewitnesses' account as well as homicidal death, the trial Court believed the evidence of PW1 to PW4 as well as PW5, the shop owner who deposed before the Court. The other circumstances are also taken note of with regard to discovery and recovery and accused No.1 to
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR 4, 6 and 7 were arrested and their voluntary statement was also recorded as per Exs.P46 to Ex.P50, which led to the discovery of place where weapons used in the offences were hidden and their consequent recovery. The witnesses with regard to the recovery are PW7, PW8 and PW23 and considering the evidence of these witnesses also, the trial Court comes to the conclusion that the weapons were not recovered nearby the scene of offence and they were hidden near the Chikkanandi cross on Gokak-Yaragatti road towards Nesargi and only on the information of the accused, the weapons were seized and no explanation was given by the accused in 313 statement and though an attempt is made to give an explanation, but the same was not accepted and considered the evidence available on record.
7. With regard to the motive is also concerned, already considered the evidence of PW1 and PW2 that a case was registered against them by the accused No.1 and they were released on bail and the accused persons having ill-will against the deceased as well as against PW1 and PW2 and the same is considered and in order to prove the case also,
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR considered the evidence of the prosecution that accused No.1 to 9 have conspired each other in committing the murder and all of them were also aware of the fact that the injured as well as deceased used to go by walk. All the accused persons came together in a car and suddenly poured the chilly powder and made an attack on the deceased and as a result of inflicting the injuries while making an attempt to save the deceased. who had sustained 15 injuries, succumbed to the injuries and also PW1 and PW2 have also sustained injuries. Having considered the material available on record, the trial Court comes to the conclusion that the evidence of prosecution witnesses i.e., direct evidence as well as the injured witnesses and motive only points out the very role of the accused. This Court also on re-appreciation of evidence in respect of other accused in the criminal appeals, referred (supra) which have been relied upon by the learned Addl. SPP is also very clear that the role of this accused is that when PW1 made an attempt to rescue the deceased, at that time, this accused inflicted the injury with the weapon of talwar.
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR
8. This Court also while coming to the conclusion has taken note of the evidence available on record particularly PW1 and PW2, who had obtained the bail in the case registered by the accused No.1 against them that they have obtained the anticipatory bail and then they developed the ill- will against PW1 and PW2 and also against the deceased and this accused along with other accused i.e. accused No.1, 4, 6 and 7 arrived in a car armed with jambe and talwars in their hands and assaulted the deceased, which has resulted in death of the deceased and also taken note of the evidence of PW1, who had sustained the injury. When the accused No.2 i.e. present appellant assaulted the injured witness PW1 and PW1 and PW2 only taken the deceased to the hospital and PW1 and PW2 were also treated by doctor-PW19 and the complaint was also given by PW1 in the hospital itself while taking the treatment. It is also to be noted that the accused persons were arrested on 27.09.2017 and they gave voluntary statement and recoveries are also made i.e. clothes and also the blood stained weapons from a bush near Nandi cross and also taken note of the injuries, which were sustained by the
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR deceased as well as PW1 and PW2 and opinion of the doctor- PW20 was also taken note of as well as RFSL report at Ex.P41 and Ex.P42 showed the traces of 'A' group of human blood on the weapons and the clothes and considering all these materials available on record, the very contention of the counsel appearing for the appellant that the trial Judge has committed an error in appreciating the evidence in a proper perspective, cannot be accepted.
9. The evidence of PW1, PW2 and PW5, who have been categorically deposed before the Court with regard to the role of the present accused as well as other accused and established their presence at the scene of occurrence and PW3 and PW4 also have supported the case of the prosecution and nothing elicited from the mouth of these witnesses to disbelieve their version and also it is very clear that committing of offences with pre-determined intention was also found and the prosecution successfully established the guilt of the accused, and minor discrepancies would not take away the case of the prosecution and the same also not goes to the very root of the case of the prosecution. When all such
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR materials are available on record, we do not find any grounds to interfere with finding of the trial Court in respect of the present appellant and his role is also along with other accused being the member of unlawful assembly in furtherance of common object, all of them joined together and conspired each other and taking the advantage of the deceased as well as injured persons for making the walking, came in a car and inflicted the injury and also purchased the chilly powder from the shop of PW12, who also supported the case of prosecution that chilly powder was purchased from his shop and all these materials point out the role of the appellant along with other accused and hence, we do not find any grounds to come to another conclusion and co-ordinate Bench of this Court also considered all the materials available on record while considering other aspects and accordingly dismissed the appeals filed by the other accused referred supra, confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence against them. Hence, no grounds are made out to answer the point as "affirmative" and hence, we pass the following:
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5742-DB CRL.A No. 100671 of 2025 HC-KAR ORDER
1) The Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
2) The judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed in SC No.228/2018 on the file of learned XII Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, sitting at Gokak is hereby confirmed.
SD/-
(H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE SD/-
(B. MURALIDHARA PAI) JUDGE JTR CT:PA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 1