Karnataka High Court
State By Yelawala Police vs Mariyamma on 18 March, 2008
Author: V.Jagannathan
Bench: V.Jagannathan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Dated the 18"' day of March 2008
:BEF'ORE:
uymuummmmmmgeaa)
1. Mariyamma, . '
W/013%: ' .,
Chu1:{x.hfim9da','.= ' V =
2%')
%%%% hes/hoeelateezccmpsgowda,
V Age:h5Q .
3. Ratlmamma,
'i'€.fe.Basa* ~ve~5ef:.':'%
. . Respondents
" ( for M] s P.Nataraju Agata, Advocate. ) Z A; Criminal Appeal filed under Section 377 ofthc C.'.r.P.C. 3 to enhance the sentence and fine 'by the JMFC ' i".araiir1'). Mysere. in C.C.I'u'e. ""9,'1':.%9'£-' dated mvielzing teneing the respondents- accused for the ozlfenccs mtioned in the judgment. This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court delivered the following : 9 .IUD(1 mm';
'J III-II' This appeal by the State -is K oi.' sentence passed by the J s,... ..__t_ fa- t__e Sections 41, 3-24 and sec 1;:-*.s.sst Lhflnafi £0 '-9 i'?
I I :5 '.4-.\.._~'I_g__ 4 1_.t___.._.'I.t' .|.1_..4. K11 um;
imideni us we flowers and guava or his house led to the accused with the complainant and I ..
anal-nun-.-.-. -an -. --.1 __._-1.. 'mu'-= Qfid the oomfllniqant thn- if was 3 . 7" ' V the flowers and the guava fruits and, V".*--.d11Ivv.'17*'v"lV"'gj\_ incident in question that took Place on at about 5.45 p.m. near the house of the ' ..ootnplaiJ1ant, it is alleged that A-2 assaulted the 'ccmplalnar-* A" * hack "flint! 51 cm. and J': 'III 'Jill I-lI'4\dl. Q I o -v :------------ww- '-"~'-ua the complainant with a stone on the 'nip A-1 restrained the complainant and tom his clothes. &/ ' f
3. The complaint lodged to the above efi'ect as per 11 as P-2 E ..y P.w.2 Che1Lvs.I.:I..m..a M to the _ L. r. _:;..2.'l registered against the accused persons fie? the offences. On completion of__the_ sheet was filed and, upon a lljxgglejrrpgggdpjpngldets V guilty, the prosecution' 9 .. A ' = 9.1%.; M 7 -and l?~1..tc' re mar denied the ice evidence.
4. record, the couri:
fouLnd_v had established its ease P.W.2 complainant, supported V and, as the evidence on the whole ' 'I"'b"'1'i.a,1u§.uau LU ** """'*-' t" R acmptable fwcwing P.We.2, 3, 5 and 7 each other, and the medical evidence of supporting their evidence, the trial court he : convlcted the accused persons for the otfences first V 'above mentioned.
5. The learned trial judge sentenced A-1 to pay a fine I Rs,500,l- in default to undergo simple 2:,
4),'.
«Es imprisonment for 15 days for the offence punishable under Section 341 of the I.P.C. and, A-.-2 were sentAe'.'?.'e.-I'... m tsndage six memhs %ph §'i'.'...'I"f-'pg and to pay a fine of R3501')/' anti'def_a1iit of 15 days was also it under Section 324 of"V__V'e_pI.IV".'G.'i Ah-'}.'--:V:is concerned, he was simple iznpriwmnent niut.e..s- _ IJIJ ,...._, a ...... .. RS500 simple fur' of the offence under
--,It.»;1§s this sentence pagged by in question by the State as ' punishment prescribed for the respectlv' e A. , offences proved against the respondents-accused it persons, in my view, the sentence passed cannot be t.err..I1er_ias1 Jeasenabieereanitbesaidthatitisaflea bite sentence. E-'SW. 1 1 uue ii"-'"r and E" Ems de'pesm"' in his evidence that the injuries found on injured P.W. iw _z (fin the form of abrasions and pain in stoma:-i1's}i_'2fi"€i'in"e was also no fracture caused to P.W.3. like nature of the case and the lease' 1:
quanel between the parties, line ll trial ceurt "ppears te m been struck in reeimet of for jnsfiee and at the same the 'accused fur acqllittajy s11:<A__lh,g "sentence passed in :m4m¢leKennf&"e¢Cqmmus wmzummm flm I I' 3 I"3
3 2
3. is 5% :.
> 1 1 :1: 3 a 3 33 greund. the sentence 'because, the eiainnot be said to be a flea bite _ rd to the overt acts alleged again' at
37.. the result, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/-1 °k°/ ' Judge"