Karnataka High Court
L Suresha @ Suri vs State Of Karnataka on 31 October, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:38694
CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANIL B KATTI
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 359 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
L.SURESHA @ SURI
S/O. LAKSHMANA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
R/O THIMMABOVI CAMP,
LAKKAVALLI,
TARIKERE TALUK- 577 228
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHARSHA B.S., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SACHIN B.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY LAKKAVALLI POLICE.
REPRESENTED BY SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
Digitally HIGH COURT BUILDING,
signed by BENGLAURU -560 001
SUMITHRA R ...RESPONDENT
Location: (BY SMT.N.ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP)
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA THIS CRL.RP FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C, PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 04.02.2017
PASSED BY THE II ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
CHIKKAMAGALURU IN CRL.A.NO.40/2014 THEREBY
DISMISSING THE CRL.A. FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND
CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.02.2014 PASSED BY
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND PRL. J.M.F.C., TARIKERE IN
C.C.NO.202/2013 AND ALLOW THIS CRL.RP.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:38694
CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017
ORDER
Revision Petitioner/accused feeling aggrieved by the judgment of First Appellate Court on the file of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru in Crl.A No.40/2014, dated 04.02.2017, which confirmed the judgment of Trial Court on the file of Senior Civil Judge and Prl.J.M.F.C., Tarikere in CC No.202/2014, dated 11.02.2014 preferred this Revision Petition.
2. Parties to the Revision Petition are referred with their ranks as assigned in the Trial Court for the sake of convenience.
3. The factual matrix leading to the case of prosecution can be stated in nutshell to the effect that on 02.02.2013 at 6:00 p.m. before the shop of CW.3 Mani situated at Mundaravalli village within the jurisdiction of Lakkavalli Police Station, accused has picked up quarrel with CW.2 Veeraswamy, pertaining to the land dispute and assaulted with the handle of pickaxe on his body, arm, thigh and back, thereby caused voluntary simple hurt. The -3- NC: 2023:KHC:38694 CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017 prosecution further alleges that the accused has administered threat to take away the life of complainant. On these allegations made in the complaint, the Investigation Officer after completing investigation filed the charge sheet.
4. In response to the summons, accused has appeared through counsel. The trial court on being prima facie satisfied of charge sheet material filed charge against accused for the offences punishable under Section 324 and 506 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "IPC".). Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution relied on the evidence of PWs.1 to 9 and documents at Exs.P.1 to P.7 so also got identified MOs.1, the documents at Ex.D.1 to D.3 were marked through the evidence of prosecution witness PWs.2, 3 and
5.
5. On Closure of the prosecution side, the statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. came to be recorded. Accused denied all the incriminating material -4- NC: 2023:KHC:38694 CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017 evidence appearing against him and claimed false case is filed. The Trial Court after appreciation of evidence on record convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC and acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC. Accused challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence before the First Appellate Court on the file of II Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru in Crl.A.No.40/2014. The First Appellate Court after re-appreciating the evidence on record by judgment dated 04.02.2017 confirmed the judgment of Trial Court.
6. Heard the arguments of both sides.
7. After hearing both sides and on perusal of judgment of both the courts below with records, the following points arise for consideration:
1) Whether the impugned judgment under Revision is perverse capricious and legally not sustainable and calls for any interference by this Court?-5-
NC: 2023:KHC:38694 CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017
8. The Courts below on appreciating the evidence of PW.1 Smt. Mallika and injured witness PW.2 Veeraswamy coupled with the evidence of PW.8 Dr.Sadananda Poojari and wound certificate Ex.P.7 recorded the finding that prosecution has proved injured PW.2 Veeraswamy suffered the injuries as noted in the wound certificate Ex.P.7 due to assault of accused and convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC. The First Appellate Court has confirmed the said judgment of Trial Court.
9. PW.1 Smt.Mallika, wife of injured PW.2 Veeraswamy, has deposed to the effect that on 2.02.2013 at 6:00 p.m. while her husband Veeraswamy was sitting in front of the shop of Mani, accused came on motorcycle and assaulted by means of pickaxe over his hands, back and legs. The incident of assault took place due to putting of bund to the agricultural land belongs to PW.2 Veeraswamy. Thereafter, injured PW.2 Veeraswamy was shifted to the hospital for treatment and then she filed the -6- NC: 2023:KHC:38694 CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017 complaint Ex.P.1. On the next day police visited to the spot and prepared spot Panchanama in her presence as shown by her Ex.P.2 and the photographs was taken at Ex.P.3.
10. PW2. Veeraswamy has also deposed about the accused coming to the place of incident on his motorcycle and questioned him about putting bund on the land. PW.2 Veeraswamy further deposed to the effect that accused by means of pickaxe has assaulted over his hands, shoulder, thigh and back, due to which he suffered injuries and he identified MO.1 pickaxe used for assaulting him. PW.3 is the owner of Kirana shop and deposed to the effect that on 2.02.2013 at 6:00 p.m. while PW.2 Veera Swami was sitting in front of his shop, accused came on his motorcycle and picked up quarrel with PW.2 Veeraswamy. PW.3 further deposed to the effect that accused by means of pickaxe has assaulted on back and other parts of the body, due to which he sustained injuries. Thereafter injured PW.2 Veeraswamy was shifted to the hospital. The -7- NC: 2023:KHC:38694 CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017 council for accused though has subjected all these three material witnesses to the cross- examination, nothing worth material has been brought on record so as to discredit their evidence.
11. The above referred oral evidence of PWs.1 to 3 is further corroborated by the evidence of PW.8 Dr.Sadananda Poojari, who has issued wound certificate at Ex.P.7 and deposed to the effect that the wife of injured Mallika brought the injured PW.2 Veeraswamy to the hospital with the history of assault by blunt object on examination found the following injuries:
1) Contusion measuring 6 cm x3 cm present over left thigh of the injured fresh in nature.
2) Contusion measuring 3 cm x 1 cm present over left arm of the injured fresh in nature.
12. PW8.Dr.Sadananda Poojari is of the opinion that the above referred two injuries are simple in nature, other -8- NC: 2023:KHC:38694 CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017 than the mere suggestion in the cross-examination of PW.8 Dr.Sadananda Poojari that such injury may be caused if a person falls on the rough surface, there is no any other evidence brought on record in the cross- examination of material witnesses of PWs.1 to 3 and their evidence is consistent regarding the manner in which the incident took place in front of the shop of PW.3 Mani, that injured PW.2 Veeraswamy suffered injuries due to assault of accused by means of pickaxe. The Courts below have rightly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence placed on record and were justified in recording findings that prosecution has proved the charge under Section 324 of IPC against accused beyond all reasonable doubt. The said findings recorded by both the Courts below are based on the material evidence on record and there are absolutely no any valid reason to deviate from the finding recorded by the Courts below.
13. Now coming to the question of imposition of sentence, The Trial Court has imposed sentence of simple imprisonment for six months and to pay the fine of -9- NC: 2023:KHC:38694 CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017 Rs 10,000/- in default of payment of fine, the accused has further ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. Looking to the evidence of PW.1.Smt.Mallika and PW.2 Veeraswamy injured witness in this case, would go to show that, the alleged incident of assault took place due to PW.2 Veeraswamy putting bund over his land. PW.1 admitted in her cross-examination that the member of panchayat Sharif Anna asked to measure the land and put the bund. PW.2 Veeraswamy also admits in his cross- examination that his land was measured and put the bund. The injuries suffered by the injured PW.2 Veeraswamy are opined to be simple in nature. The incident in question took place on a spur of moment without there being any preparation or plan to inflict injury on PW.2 Veeraswamy. Therefore, looking to the evidence produced by the prosecution and the nature of the injuries suffered by PW.2 Veeraswamy, the sentence imposed by the Trial Court which is confirmed by the First Appellate Court is too harsh and call for interference by this Court.
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC:38694 CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017
14. It is the sentencing policy that the sentence ordered must be proportionate to the proven guilt against accused. The imposition of sentence shall be neither exorbitant nor flee bite sentence. The Court will have to exercise it's judicial discretion by keeping in mind the evidence placed on record and the nature of injury suffered in the alleged incident and the other attending circumstances leading to the incident in question. The offence under Section 324 of IPC is punishable with fine or imprisonment or both. In this case it cannot be forgotten that injured PW.2 Veeraswamy is of 60 years age and criminal force was used by accused and assaulted by means of pickaxe. Therefore, under the given set of facts and circumstances of the case, if the accused is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and a fine amount as ordered by the Trial Court is ordered to be maintained, then it will meet the ends of justice. Consequently, proceed to pass the following order.
- 11 -
NC: 2023:KHC:38694 CRL.RP No. 359 of 2017 ORDER The Revision Petition filed by the Revision Petitioner is hereby partly allowed.
The judgment of the Trial Court in CC No.202/2013 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and Prl.J.M.F.C., Tarikere in convicting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC, which is confirmed by the First Appellate Court is ordered to be modified as under:
The accused is convicted for the offence under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months.
The fine amount with default sentence as ordered by the Trial Court is ordered to be maintained.
Registry to send back the records to Trial Court with a copy of this order.
SD/-
JUDGE GSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22