Shivanand S/O Chandappa Lamani vs The State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Shivanand S/O Chandappa Lamani vs The State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009

Bench: Huluvadi G.Ramesh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA

C§RC'.UIT BENCH AT DHARWA9

Dated this {ha 12% day of February, 2009". 

Befima

mg H<>N'BLz«: MR JUSYYCE HULUVADI_ . T'

Crimjna} Revisicn Pettition z{e5"o.9'}9':2;V2':;o:>*A [I '-
Betxvean:

1.

§I~¥iVANAND S/O CHANDA?"PA"i.-AMAN§._ AGE: 27 YEARS ace: cQo1__,_:_e:-.__ -- ' «- R/O DHADIBHAVI '§'I~'i~ANlI)A * j TQ: RAMEURG ~ " V. ' mgr; BELGAUM :2. 2xm~:,G,APPA L'£_I\I'*€3sAPE?Ps. . _ 3/Q'=wAGHA?1=2a;.aL1,A3s.4:Ar§:" _ AGE: :29' YEARS ---r:3<:'.<;::-.Cic)GL1E R10 23HLA:)iBHAvIAT§;.5raDA TQ:-.I?AMDU,RG~' ' D2;ST:"BELGAUM. _____ *._3». f1NA;~z.¢+AP§A~-vs/0 WAGHAPW; LAMANE ' .«Ta<;:--E;':»--23 YEARS OCC: COOLIE . R40 'D£§AI3~;fBiHA.vI '1'H,AN§A H*_;1ffQ.+ RAMEEERG ms1'*1:ﬁi::'LGAUM PETITIONERS H " 3:3: CTH JAQHAV 85 P PRASANNA Ki} MAR, Anvsy »# And:

THE STATE QF KARNATAKA BY KATKGL ?GLiCEZ J b i?Ei3. BY S?!' V' HIGH COURT BUILDING BA?éGAL()RE~560 001 _ 1"R;gs?é;§ aENT" = .. (833 Sri: ANAN3 NAvALGI2»§A'mi_;"~&>gP;>)V_ % _ CRLRP FILES U/.';3'.3§'?'7' _4{i1, '£3R.P.€.l BY THE ADVOCATE FOR, THE} APET:TI0_NE;R3~v,PRAYi'NG TSAT THIS H£)N'BLE <:0::r.32i1' B.E"j»'E'LEASEI1)'TQ' SET ASXDE THE JUDGMEN'1fé§. C§E.*{)ER'--{)Ff_ ::omc:*rk:x:~.»1: AND SENM'i'ENCE3 mxgz.11.:;2o(;s~;44..::*;$.v::";<::sEB_V--r3'x'~._'I'14»iE~110;, F'{'C., RAMDURG IN CRLA.NO.8]G3,;"_'I'£"iEREBY' DESMESSING THE APPEAL AND coNF;v:€rs11;~;<;.TH':a, :IU'DGMENT..&a»':ORDER 01+' CONVICTION 3:. s£:NTEN<';:%i:_. ;;)'Ii.V134.4:;.20n3. PASSED BY THE JMFG, RAMDURG, EN (.":RL,CASE 5:10.293/00.

Trais CRIMEML ,VR'E;Vie:§<>r§"'_;?E?r1'r1QN COMING ON FOR ADMISSEQN T:+::s 1;)AY;a THE coum' MADE THE FOI..5LQWING«:.%--{ ~ « ' Thié.' ggvisigyn ﬁled by the peﬁﬁonem seeking to 3621:

~ order c>"f Fast Track Judge, Ramdurg in Criminai ";'J9;S§§_20O3 in dismissing the agpeal arid also: the w c§~i3t1r:i*"k>f JM§'C:, Ramdurg in C.C.No.93/2008 in convicting 5%., and smitencing the pwtiﬁonem for the eﬁence under Sectiens 323, 324, 356% and 452 rfw 34 IPC.

2. Heaxﬁ the it-':£iI'.t1€{} CGUIISEI for the ptxtitiencrs anci the laarzixed Government Pieadcr.

3. According ta) the iearncd ccvungel far the them 11$ contracliction in the version of the vi<:=t'2_'.m" as "ir';"}:¢%§j:

evidence with that of ihe co333;pi;«2iiit'--f£ied--}<. at': u attributed against the petiiioners {£3 -ti}:

2.1z:de1;;_ Se._=::t:;3.cAV;§V1i:£e,%:VV*324--, '8_5§4.__ eﬁd 452 of I?C and Without scmtinising %fNbe"t=.§ié.%¢11<%é---- record, the Trial Couri: as well as t}1:e" z5§j{.}%}§»8L{€ZV:{V3VOV!{1I'tV'haV€ committed an error in ccmvicting '' anéi 3e'i1i:r:3_1<§§:;g the accused which zﬁquires intarference.

the ieaxned Gevemment Pieader submitted xﬁhat is no ﬁI'Zi)I' as such to interfere with the ardent of ih.erdi$missa1 passed by the Sessions Jucige and 3150 'Ehﬁ __r§1'der sf JMFC in cztmvicting azgd scntsncing the accuscé. Xx'

5. As per the prosecution version, on ?~5-2{}0C.~' 4.00 p.m., these petitiozxers said to have $:respa:7g@dv 1 "

house of the cempiainant situated; i:}.€.1i{§1ii:)"} 1V";':5."f»i"..§;: u u asking the Whereaheuts 01" the pa:§:1'1t$ of and may were stating that 'vfgaxrét Ag-ﬁle $01 for * L' which, these petition»:-:rs§_ ::1i:2"£1s<i:_<i_L: ﬁlthy language 2136 said :0 and steam.

The complainant ear and 21330 petitioners holding her hands to outrage her meéesty.

The "éufter franling charges against the ac::.us:::é, ' a,f'te'rV rcievaxzt Wimcsses and ths " V' has: ﬁamd per the averment in the complamt, abusing the conlpiainant in ﬁlthy Wouid not he suﬁicient to attract; the ;;)rovisi03:;'3':.Gf Secticm 504 IPC, as such the words are being ' ;éou;:¥.i;:i:i:>13i§; used in such areas, as the area is belonging to béérkward area. Rcfezrring to ﬁhe eviﬂence sf P.W.2 to P.W.6, 11oﬁ13.g that M03 1 to 4 Iiamely sasméz stcsnes used far the commission Q? the oﬁencc ané also noting that there were broken banglﬁ pieces, the Triai Court; htzld the accused guiity of the offences with which, they were charged, atatiﬁgj " £§1a.t the accused haii tmspassed into the .

compiainant aﬁé they hurt hm' with stgges. 3:;

6. Thf: Sessions Juégc is [also {if vie1..f§i"_~A examination of the Investigati:1g.L Gﬁice:r iﬁilwt 'the case. It is rusted ~1;hc fmily membezfs 13;:-,5a51z.'t§_z' sxzctions cf the Society and accused €237: 'ycimgj age also acted that $116 sentence impaged. an is on the h1gh' er siée. Ftlrthar . . "'haviLagC' :1<';tcd-- ma coiidiict 331$ involvement of the accused in £h€Va Vss:=i€13§.Acé§$:::, 'the Sessisns Court has mnﬁtmed this erdcr Of'C~i;_3;g'€?iC¥;§€}i:§.; ﬁwswever, ﬁlm sentéﬁiﬁxf ES??? {"5?';';.£_'~_*';5"§'€§-, A V The learned Magistrate has sentenced tbs accused to uiidacrgo six months simple imprisonment for the oﬁence V' under Section 324 WC, and to undergo six months" $if%ﬁ§}1€ imprisenmengand in pay a ﬁne {pf Rsa500j~ each,;'"in" A ti} undergo simple imprisonment for one t};:é;"

eﬁence under Section 354 IPC;

Rigorous imprisonment for 0.21; year" .-and to 1 a ' fair: 'Cf Rs.5Q0[ ~ each, in default to si1Vi1,§}l§é'[iii1p§'.%;sc>;111;ae;£1t far one month for the offence _§u;iis'1?1g11 $ie.Q11ndef'Séé{:ti<3n 452 of IPC.

8. On ﬁts c;i".»P."N.2 to P.W.4, it is scan that under 1 ' .. ®t:Etioners=~accusc3*:ﬁ have comm£i%géi., tre:§}3a:ssV if they have committed '{I'E:Spa8$ with aﬁinten¥:;o';3 {he complainant, then it is ; _I:;u the «case, in the absence of any such m.€)£.iv<:: €:§i'= the overt act attributeﬁ against these ,p61;iti{}:'i1€f£§' j_i'E1 cy 'WEIR inside the hausc 0f the ,_¢_¢9m§1a;ia:antt" angd' assaulted them and also dragged their 3;, 'ﬁes 13.0% neccssarily attract the oﬁence unﬁer Sections $54 IPC. A1: the most, offerzct unsier Section 823 W Wtiiﬂﬂd be attracted. Having regard to the nature of susiained by the; mjured gaerscxns, as the _ Section 324 is not amacmd, the accu $§:d could' i;e::':§;oii"€ictz:d V' '' only for the Giffence under Sectierz 321:3' iv T pmvidcs fer imprisonment for n5ne:__year'o_1~°j'§_nc g;.;"agi1§h bcifih"

But, in the ﬁnstant C:-':1Sf:, the falsely implicated. Having against the petitioners as._)::.otedA,.ab"Q=s;e; V__%:}%)viS;ﬁ;g§i£§$€§;:b£§f Sf:Cﬁ()I1 323 would alone iﬁ case for Section 452 or 384 icy Vceurse, the accused might mmpiainaﬂt and when there £1 the cmzxxplainant anti the accussd whéié $;skiﬁ~g iiixekirhereabouts af the pamnts of the *c:'o:;épiai3:i.:a.:'1t,A.« whé:1""Ehc9 comyhajnaxizt answered diﬁemnﬁy, to have agsaulteei them by causing simpie H In the circumstances, in modiﬁcation of the order of V. the courts below in coznﬁcﬁng £11: accusati far the I W effﬁznce under Sections 324, 354 am; 452 {P0, it gg "V. 0I'€i€I'€d that the accnseé shall pay a ﬁne (sf V' and in default, to uncierge simpk:

0f one month. Accmdingiy, the rcvisigm part.

mpkf --

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court