Karnataka High Court
Sri Ashok vs The State Of Karnataka on 15 September, 2022
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.291 OF 2021
BETWEEN
1. SRI ASHOK
S/O KARIBASAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
2. SMT. MANJULA
W/O ASHOK,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/A: KOLKUNTE VILLAGE,
DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 003.
... PETITIONERS
[BY SRI. V.B.SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE]
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
HADADI POLICE,
DAVANAGERE - 577 002
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. SMT. ROOPA
W/O PARASHURAMA,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
KOLKUNTE VILLAGE,
DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 003.
... RESPONDENTS
[BY SRI. S. VISHWA MUTHY, HCGP FOR R1]
2
***
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 04.12.2020 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE,
DAVANAGERE IN S.C.NO.147/2018 ON THE APPLICATIONS FILED
BY THE PROSECUTION U/S 216 OF CR.P.C. AND BE PLEASED TO
REJECT THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PROSECUTION TO
INVOKE SECTION 376(2)(n) OF IPC, S.C.NO.147/2018 ON THE
FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND
SPECIAL JUDGE, DAVANAGERE.
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE/PHYSICAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned High Court Government Pleader takes notice for respondent No.1/State.
2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 04.12.2020 passed by the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Davanagere in S.C.No.147/2018.
3. Vide impugned order, the learned Sessions Judge has allowed the application filed by the prosecution under Section 216 of Cr.P.C., and ordered for alternation of charge.
3
4. Charge sheet is filed against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 504, 323, 506, 201 read with 34 of IPC. Since, the victim had alleged that accused No.1 has committed rape on her more than once, the prosecution filed an application under Section 216 to alter the charge from 376 to 376(2)(n) of IPC.
5. Obviously there are no allegations against accused No.2 with regard to the above charge sought to be altered. The allegations against accused No.2, is that she, who is the wife of accused No.1, has abused the complainant in filthy language and also assaulted her with hands. Hence, charge-sheet has been filed against accused No.2 for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 504 of IPC. The charge sought to be altered is only against accused No.1.
6. The learned Sessions Judge has observed while allowing the application filed under Section 216 of Cr.P.C., that there are prima facie materials to show that 4 the act of alleged rape was not a single incident, but it was a repeated one and therefore Section 376(2)(n) attracts. Further, the punishment for the said offence is greater in decree then the punishment prescribed for the offence under Section 376 of PIC. There is no error committed by the learned Sessions Judge. There is no merit in this revision petition. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
Consequently, I.A. is dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE HB/-