Paramesha S/O Ramanna vs State By Nonavinakere Police on 1 June, 2009

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court

Paramesha S/O Ramanna vs State By Nonavinakere Police on 1 June, 2009

13? THE HIGH CQURT OF' KARNATAKA AT 

mmtn mzs ms 0132: DAY 61? JUNE :>,;t3--0a¢r' "i  J"

BE§'C}RE,  

THE HOWBLE.;»zR.JUS'?IcE;"A.s{_PA'CHJr1A¥>:.§;.2f;§ 

CRIMINAL REWSION':%r:g*:i?1f?I0:i:'-N:)..351i:.;?:{f§_Q;§;... 
BETWEEN V' . i

1. Paramesha, 
Agezd about 25 years, '-
Son of Ramanna,  "
Agricu1tu,iiS':,  

 Suxesha,    .   :
Ag¢§:_iV abmii  yeargg  «.
S6311 -Sf' P,e}gﬁ1'%g¥f.sxi?d3.',~ . «V 

A1} .;azt:._rési.di13.5gL«ai'   _ ' 

Kaxikem  ' ,\  

Nénavinakere ' Hzéhii,'  "
;'Tip1:ur Taitlkg' V '

j  "?Tqm1cgr II}§.s"33";'.vv;:.1."./.. » E ,. i3E'FE'£'IOi'€ER/ S

  i:I;a 21£;:£3;é;n:tha§pa, ﬁsdvj

1 State §:gyV'"'¥iio.:41xavi13ai<eI€

1 "'m;;¢e, 'Pip"t11r Taluk,
A  Distxict

" §§c§_re:.¥;eni;ed by the

--  Sfate Public Pmsacutcr,

ﬁfﬁ-cc of the Advacatt:

Q " "Genera, High Court Building,
* Ba11gaiorc--:'"S60' em.  Raspomam'/S

{Szri 3. Balakrishna, HCGP)

ii:-§rs\r§r:1Ir



IN}

This Criminal Revisizm Petitien is ﬁled under Sé:k::ti<$:n.f:§9?
R/W 401 CR.P.C praying ta} set aside the Judge_1:ié'11:VV'g:1§.2£_f'.?.--A
05 passed by the Add1.C.J,(Jr.§n) & JMFC. -i{'iptL.u§, " .00':

N0.95[{}4 and the Judgement 1):. 7-1-06 pa53S€':(}."'by"-121:: ;*.(>...,x 

F'i'C--IV. Tumkur, in CrI,A.N¢::>. 90/O5-<aﬂd«€1C€}g .1it .}?etiiiQf:.:ei'$. '

This Criminal Revision Peﬁuéa  
this day, the Court, made. the foﬁg>wing';._  A  " 

The: revisicn peﬁnégﬁsrs    cenvictic:-:1
and sentrancc for §h€  326 read with 34
{Pt} on a   by:=A._'--:.'"i'iﬁi:1:§ii*' and conﬁxmeid in
Criminai     A

'Fh::~ 'f'_a_r"§:1€ purpose sf this petftﬁon are
as u_nde:r:   ' ' 'V 4. W  s

"  §F'W..2  is the resident of Karikem village.

 lands bearing Rt3'§?iSi€1i}f1 Survey N0.9'?/ IQ

"1;*:.1&3":;s1Té:*1';1*:t.g~--. 2 acres and the said land is under his

culﬁvatign sﬁiée long It is on 13.4.2003 when the comylaizzaiut

'Anj3n&pf::%¥. PW.1 alﬁngwith his rtﬂative PW2 Parashuramajah,

  ef ?'W.2 Endiramma, i,.e., PW5, Panzathmma the wife

VA   "cf? the ttompiaiuant PWZ3, PWJ7 Mazrulappa the father sf {Em

 compIai3:1az1t and Gawrama PWK6 the mother of U316

compiainazzi were deing agricultural operations in that {naming

at abaut 8:33 a.m,, ths accuseci 1 £0 3 haiémg '£316 Chzbs and

pct;



the sickie in their haxyﬂs came to the iand and ques:igi1i%ig_V_fhe

eompiainaut about their authority to plough 

Aecusecri No.1 assaulted PW. 1 with the sick} _.*g:=h..efeVEiS~:}'xecus§é:£.. 

No.2 assaulted. 91353.2 am 3 with the eltibe ;ém<:'.a.cg£:;se§":>;g;.:'1

assaulted P\«Vs.5 anci 6 with E:Vhe__c'::}.ub«S' .'i§11€1"€  

assaulted PW?' with the clubs}  ifijuries and
when PWS. 4 and 8 i.e,;,  and  Kumar
intervened, they paCi:ﬁe§Vi_V_ 'T'¥;}:_1V_e  thereafter the

accused leﬁ atgtlze s'pr:} ii zéiuszi iaient away.

 It."   1 finjanappa approached
PW.11   Ex.P.1 which came {:3 be

registered   for the oﬁence uaéer Sectien

 'e324'-';§$ad_:a:i::: A34 if5C"'a:3.°d he sent the cempiaint Ex.i3,.1, the FER

 Niagisnate anci thereafter, sent the injared is

'{he' h{:3epi1_;aI.~ 'l_EA~i'e visiteé the scene 9?? occurrence an the same

  "gay, at ~}, 33.33;. and in the presence of PW.9 and another held

A  eye: mahazar Ex.P.3 and seized {W0 elubs and the sickle

MQASE tea 3 unéer the eaid mahazar 312$ recorded the

u atatemezzis of the witnesses. After the injured were treateti, he

3130 reccsrded their statements 313$ arrested the accused and



relsased them 0172 1:333}. After the c<)2.n;:>1£:{:i<::1:1_.._<;_>f the

irivestigatian, he ﬂied the c3:1a;rge3heet against the: a<:atj1.17&:§=;§i§_. "'.V"

4. During the trial, the prosecution €:xanf;ii1e:xj{.3:'o'. 

l1 and in their €Vifie11'CE': gt): marksjd »tEI:1<.=.   
£3.13 and M03. 3 to 3. After tbs c:1of';=*.f¢1:':r:"': €)'i; {hit
prosecuiiexz, the siatsment ofa¢cﬁ#$'£:s"i"xxe*r:1je %f:{§§§I'ded*';u11ﬁe1£ L'
Section 318 Cr.P.C.. They haveAtai§'::f1_th§: C1t*;*..f'é:13:!::<%,;_AAof_;;0ta1 denial
and did net lead anyv   ffiowever, they got

marked E$:s.D.1 Atav {).1§3"'tiie:'";1<51'§1}€)_n'§$f ﬁtatcments in the

eviﬁenczté of  _
S. *%;'§*1'@--'1'i*1.'3:1V  the Asst. Pubiic Prosecutor and

the counsel f:.3*1' ¥§i}.€v€.c.fa(:e£;;'£;!_.Sé{.'£: and on appxtciation 0:5 the naatftﬁai

" '~.;_;;z1  cQnVicté§;"'**::1*::§ accused i.€:., the pstitionerg herein fer '

 :G1;".f;'ei;r:;:u::9 iiiziéicrtj Section 326 of IPC and ordereé to unsisrgo

Rf _ fdr 9.1i;jev' §z_;=.;ér and to pay a {me (If Rs..'3,Q{}O/~ each aﬁd in

 ::ief3;11h'~.  gayment ef ﬁne, ta undergo SJ. far two n10':3,t§1s.

A V~:Lj2'iggVii*ié%veé by ihé c0n.vi<:ti<m anﬁ S€I1'C§ﬂ£2'€, the petitiozzem

'  afgpmached the Sessiens Couﬁ: at Tumkur in Crimnal Appﬁai

 E-:o.90;20<35 which was heard by the Fast Traek Ceurt N0.W

and the aypeal was digmissed Vida judgment anti Carder riatezif



5
?,1.20{)6. Aggrievecl by 'aha concurrent ﬁndings of couvictian

311:1 sentenca, the accuséd have apgaroached this €';%>i3_rt in

Itvision.

6. I have heart} the learned couﬂscl for   

also the learned High Court Gove1Ig}i¥i:§i';§1éad€5:*;.:_.:;T};€:L

that arise for my ccnsideraticn 1 A. . V  VV
i. Whether the CGI2ViCﬁOﬁ""%iid se;1tc1_3%€€T  B3' th.éV
Trial Court ancif  fer the

€.)ffCI1C€ under   WC is iliegal

V "  
ii. 'Nhat £3-1ﬁ$3':§iT§?*'~ . V 

27. *3;$ 'L?1€VV'a":§igf:€'13T!%§£J:: of {he §earn.e(i 9911:1361 fear the

 _ pc:it::$:;17er:s t1;at'"t1:.r§ Vfggmizxg er' the charge by the T1323} Court as

 éiiégaj ;3.'(V:z§:3:?..§.V::,;"---"T:zici~':~?<.:;rf:2<%::r* and that the petitioners were migied due is

 of tile charge and 3:13 furtimr submits that

thaiigh ':;i:1ér'c= is evidence that til:-2 Ciathes 9f' the injumd were

" H "   siisjzgedﬁ may Wﬁfﬁ ma: Ssizeai by the 901366 311$ that mare

_'  a%:r_é'mé1"ieria} irzcongisiensies 311$ Contiadictiens in the e::vide:":<;*-3

  ~s:::f: $33.6 33»'é%wii:21.ess ané that the petiticzmrs WEFE faiseiy

V impﬁaated due to $15 Eanci éiﬁjﬂﬁtﬁ which was €§{iS?:j§1g bemwen

them. in 316 cirsumstazzcasg hif submitg {hat E116 app:'s€:iati§2/



:3
0f the evidence by the Trial Court and tha acceptaztace sf the
same by the first appellats Cauré: is illsgai and impmpcir and

ultimately, he subunits that the ipgurrzzti have suff¢i*é;yi'T.;0ni}?

sinxple izxjuries and no material has bﬁﬁifi piacezti gbétx  ta

prove that thzt wimasses haw: suifemci g:'ievo1.:s.  fﬁfifi' 1:1 

the circumsiamces, he submits f:?1€1t:.ﬁi6::. %;{;:fié%ic%§ié:1' ,'€[hIe

petiﬁoners far the Gifance und;e:1*.SeCti{m_ 3136 :34':';iE.5C 1%" L.

illegal and perverse.

8. Per contra, tEie:' ';ea::1é:£:1} Hig;b; VCou;rt Government

Pleadm».~"éi;11nﬁiiis u  CO}f.¥.{31lI'I'€I1'{. ﬁndings af
ceuvictién 'by i}1;eV€§?a:11r£sV'i3s~:=:1é:;»§2s: and further that there are no

maierial cc>f:'i§°21::Eict1o:1:~;._$J:3g1"the mere mistake Cemmittﬁé by tha

 _§:1v;¢.*s;i:iga_'i§i;*3.g; GﬁiCar_____i;r1v::o{. seizing 13:16: hiomé stained cioﬁxes

 iﬁséif£:;s.._1:1a:1t'uSi1ﬁi<:i€tI1t to: discard tbs evidance cf tha injursd

witﬁessés; iséizbmits that there is ample material ':9 prove

~V :hs.t.4'P§§%':é. _: hit; 3 ané 5 tea 1? have susiained griﬁvous anti simpie

.iIfij't;§;E'i§ES éné their iIij'%.};§'}9' certiﬁcates have heen admitted in

.  éiviéeﬁce thmrugh. 'the {meter PWZEQ 331d in View 0%" {ha ampia

VV "materiai placed (:1: record, he submitg that the petitioners have

rm': maée 011': any such gmunés to wamamt {ha ij£1f€I'f€I'€IlC{M



9. 1 haw scrutizaizcd the evidence led by thfi prQ$'6Cution

and alse the documaxus preduced. At the ﬁrst ﬂit is

relevant. to "note that the ;i.n<:id€:1t occurred 'afi 4_

about 8.30 am. It was in the mc;:i:I§;11--g.v{zi1e;:1 ihe  « '

complainant and his family had   

Re.Survey No.97,'1() to plough:-1r;heV_Asai§¥§V' it.:i§':..gé1i1e~géjd t1:1a}*: 

the accuseé in furﬂ1era3;1¢e of fi.1cv.@VV1'if"Lv€?(51I1;3ao1.i illfﬁﬂfjéﬂ came to
tha land to cause assaﬁif others anned
with the sickle  ci1::?;:é'é3s1$:i:i;.  on PWs.1 ta 3
ané 5 to 2?.__   on 13.4.2093 at

about   went to the Pablce Station

after aboiit_ i2E.3{}"V1idé{r;:éi1:;§"Sﬁbmitted his compiajnant as per

Ex.P,f1.'."  '$1 ﬁne saéid camplaint and he semi: the

 aiurgg  FER Ex.P,1() to the Magistrate. It is

I .;ia§t€._t§:1at the complaini was rézgisteretti on the same

dag--i1;¥3¢t»x:*e;é'%1AT12.3O and 1.00 pm. and the compiaint was sent

 the" -Magistrate at 2.00 pm. and was received. by the

V'   on the next day 11.6,, 03 15.4.2003 at abeui: '?.45

  _ g§g;1, it is no dcubt trua that there is delay in receipt of the first

 izxformatian report by the Magistrate' B111: as could ba 35611

fram the trviéence 0fPW.1{) the Doctor, who treated the injured,

 



8
he states that the injured were brought to the Hospitalhtbz' the

purpose of treatment on 13.42003 at about 10.00 a.

10. * PW2 Paxashuramaiah was   Z  

examination fmmd that he bani _p   J es

meifztitmeii in Ex.P.4. It reveals that A .2 1p1;a':'1'Va,

diffuse sweliing present ovetfv.   region;
tenderness present ever 'me abeite  tentiveniess present
over the anterior aspect: ﬁght   wound present

over the tip of   sweﬂing pzesent

over the  AV  attéi-vV__a_t1teﬁ0r and lateral aspect and
te:1deI'}3.es'S;.vV_1r5:'esent«O%%er :_the"a¥E)0ve svveﬁjng. He was admitteci

to the}:-Qspitsi   and was discharged on 22.4.2003.

.  "E"%1eV'  Was'  on 16.4.2003 and on examinatien of

 éviegtxjtd that there was comminuted fracture of left

ﬁbille and  czimumstances, he has certiﬁed that injuries 1

 3 aﬁtifi are simpie and injuries 5 and 6 are grievous in

  "--f;atgre{.'. So far as the histmy tés cencemed, he has stated that

V'  there was an assault 0;: the i:t13'u:red on 13.-4.2Q()3 at about 8,00

$4.,

 am.



63

1 1. PW. 1 was 3130 examined who: had S"L1St8.'§11€d as many
as six inj1:1I:i<~':s and the X~1"ay was ebtained. which reveaied that

there was fracture of I Metacmpei "boas. He had $13.5§3;ai11§:t;i.V_as

many as 6 injuxies and injuries 1, 3 to 6 were S1i_Lii}.)'It:: _

and injury No.12 is grievcras. The Xwmy of thc--.»l:'E:f:.V..

obtained and 011 exanxinaﬁan Gf 'E}f1t1:=,__}<:--I:'{3"}2;'3:v i533!

cartiﬁes that injury No.2 is grievmm.

12' PW6 indiramma was "::xami::1e_ﬁi '::>3': .1thé.:s§éiine day

and she had sustained a;'s:..;:aa11§?3 as %.:i::j££:tics. T116 I}§;>Ct0r has

mrfifiedﬂ tha1:_ éa,iiv.'v:}:_sé'«.iI1;§1;ii*i4:s .a_z"e simpir: in nature. PW6
Ge:wramm'a.V}w 'as :éXamii1r:d;'s11e had sustained as many as

two ingunss, L3,, 'size lacérateci wa:;:11:1d an sea}? measuring

V. E:'«,s;bQ1ii--:6 5?:  '£2 e§:§Wzjf§;er the fmntai regien of ms head and

"ts:ri3ei€ri1e,s s..V_}:):*és:zi;»E over the pastesiar aﬁpeci ami upper 1/3 of

ma Aisrgfi  The {meter csrﬁﬁes that these ;i}ZI}ilI'i€S am

 'simple £13; jiatura. PW3 Faxvathamma was {3X8iﬂIi§€iC§ ajxﬁ 3116

V'  "i€ia:%,_sii::taj1m& ﬁbres iﬁjurics am}; the injurjz certiﬁcate Eias been

 _.  pr:o'ﬁuceé: ai Ex,P,8 312$ the doctar states that these izzjurées are

  s£mp1e in mature. PWI? Mariﬂappa wag examined am} he haé

sustained fem' injuries and '£115 Dacia: has deposed about the

nattzrﬁ of tha ﬁxjuries am} the izzjmjg Certificate has mien



ii}

pmduceci at Ex.?.9. Furthermore, $0 far as the natum sf 'tha
injures are-: concctmcd, though the counsel for the pfaﬁtjoixcr

disputed the same, and contended that the 

ivy all these injtmzxri were simple in nature, ﬂ'1'£_", ' p:*o.$;ééi1Ttf;€'jn'V' 

raiias upon Ex:-';,P.}1, 13.12 and §?;'1"3,"'t.h§:

looking to these X~rays, the  hé§.':;_., sLaI;3d 

evidence that the injured PWS;  2 have 's1;$f3,ifx¢Ei' 'griévo11é'

injuries as stated above.» 'So ih;%:"'pé rLz$éJLA_of tiié' cviciénce cf the
Doctor and that of the 4'i1ij_1':s;réd_V  'consistently go to
Shaw that PWs. I    grievous ixxjuriszs

Wh€:rea*.§..Ares:t' 0:"  simpie injuries.

13;   S  evidence crf the iqiured, the

 _;3res;€5::u:i_§é11exai1iim%:§_¢.PWs. 4 and 8 who are independcznt

 "art not reiated to any of the rmjured or tea the

accuzaed. ' If-.isVA'TI='ziI:1r5: consistent version of them: two Wimesses

'V abcztii fThE§.«as::~§§uJt by Accuseé Nos. 1 to 3. Both the injured and

 '&'«1§3C1.;§$€§ stats that it is Accusad Na} who caused the

-  é':~;ysy3;1iIt an P913. It anﬁ 5 an& Accusad N29,? caused as$au}t cm

 '¥'W$.2  3 and Accused No.3 caussd assauit an PWS6 and

x ?. So there is consistant version. as far as the gar: piayad by

iihﬁ 8CCl.'lS€d £3 concerneci and there are conesgxonding iRju 



Ii
sustained by the injured persons and the medical evicience is

consistent with the evidence <31" the injured and aisg the

ﬁyewimcsscs.

14. it is well established principle  K 

evidence of the injureci cannot be  étiiséaxtieﬂktbiéxj.§b.éHsc$3.c

reason that an injured generaﬂy implicates 011:5?' 't};:'Le 'pé'rs0d3..

who has realiy has caused  (ie:>_:::s-  éi
person who has not causcd thé  So «éénsiiiering this

principle, in the context  tiie  fb;¢ mjured and the

eye wit:f1esséS"  s:'§id:;c:nce:.éf thf: Doctor PW.}.O, there: is
ample mateﬁa] (Z3';EiVvi'f.'3;fA§f'tZ23'l>.V"»tEVi"}"f'}1E{)Vo'*f3 that the accused came to the

land A0':  a_§:1:§.V€%a1§:scii":the assault wiih sickle and ciugbg.

  *é;1';~.e 'ﬂn0ctof« St:>ités that the injuries sustained can be:

  §:aiL;Ts_§€d ::'b'§% tHt..3x% »:ap0ns like the SiC}:{ki and clubs which have

Fla': M03311 1:0 3 and which were ssizetti from thﬁ

gscene cf mcmtrsncc.

 "A15. As {far as 1:13: place 0f the incident is concerned:

" "though the wimasses state that the assauit took place in the

Laﬁd, some ef the Witnatzisses state that the assauit teak piact:

ever the briﬁge near the land" it is §:rabab1€ that when :31:

9,4,.



12

assault is started. by the accustzé, some sf the izzjured may run

{rem the piacs and if they are chased and are assa;1:}';é{i,i"§Eie

actual place of incident would changa. £11 that .€;:3ntc§isf1i§iif7  

matter, the mere fact that some  ~?1£{:3*i_":5zer§:iii

assauited on the bridge and semis Siﬁttid 

assauited in tha land is itseliiiiqt a    t.i1e,.

evidence of the i3:1§11:r€d Witne$ses,____ui@_ '
16. It is no doubt ti*L1£éjt}iaL{   have admitted in

their evidence thai'-after  iwiiirjthes were hlooés

sta1"ned.:'iiifii§7'as.  .:jiI:;;e ixiifésiiigaﬁng Qﬂicer to seize the
clothes ief i the --  they are the :i11€r3'm1'nating

<:i.r<:"%1m_stanc¢:5s~. to? pZf¢vZ"}f$e7€A"E_1}{ii"'iiEiC't that the 'Wif3f1t":SS€S suffered tha

 ' ;i1:ju1.i§s. I But Whtmsver 3 wrong is cammitted by the

V'=.Eﬁvéé§;1iga':i,i1g;{i*ﬁii€er in not seizing 1111:: biood stainsd cicthss is

izseifgiot suiéiigizmgt to discard the evidencﬁ 0f the injured and

'gather indﬁgeﬁdent wimessres.

   Farthezmere, though it is Sﬁhlniitééi by the learfned

 '£1:-miinsei that all fhﬁ perstcans have sustained; simple injuries, the

i evidance sf {he Sector PWJ8 makes it 5:633; Clear that PWSJ1

azxd 2 had sustaizied the fmctuma and he has Emkeé hate the

A



13
Xwray producztci at §3x$.P. 11 to R13 and thereafter has (iepczsed
before the C0131': that PWS.1 and 2 had sustained the iiﬁctures

which can be caused by the weapons like the (,':3;i7£§)'$Vw..*.?,_i.'1¥iJ;.*Vii::VfA'j2»"T!'fZ

sickle which are tha dangerous weapans. II_1V__t?}:: 1'ai x'éi§§wi_<;f'  

matter, I do not think that '£h€3I'\E'  is   2sf.1,:§'*:sstz-;i:1:z:g3_:  _t§:.e

contentioﬂ raised by the Ieaxnartgti cclinfétzi for  tpeiititﬁziﬁér  t'<:x 

substantiate his contemim} "the inj'L1_i_ie5 simple iii

namrcz.

18. {fig  of law that }iI1€)tiV(3 is {:1
twe eézgigédTV\J§?e*:,aiﬁ§3n. :ii;F13;é'.f'§ict tfiﬁuéitv {hare was 3 land disputﬁ
beh&?e€:~ﬁy,;;}1€"  «'3CCi1S€(i is not in disgsazitex The

1C'38.}ITli1@(i  c0z1iis»a_1'e:<}:itei1c1Si}:iat becauge, of this 131161 dispute the

 V'  in§uﬁ5d iffzavtas.  thsm. It is relevant to note that

 $.'1_ Suifextd griavoirzs mjuries i do not thizak that

fcﬁr   timy couid try to impiitzata the perstcms Whcs

 am 13I;c:}:rs;:ésrned. 'Ta cause the assault, than': is nectitssity sf

A .. ﬁ31Vc3:; Lisaetativé: 311$ fer implication; as Wéﬁ, {ha moﬁve is essenﬁai.

'   ms evidencs: sf the ixxgureci. ans? 1:316 eye Wimessas is very'

" ﬂinch acceptable, I hoid that the possibﬁity of faisa impiicatioa

can be everzuizaci by the trustwerthy 31261 accaptable evidence 0f

14

thtse wifI1€SS(i*S,

 



iii

19. Furthermerc, the dafence: has get marked the

contraétictions in the statement of the W:;i:t1€:sss<3s .a(:_ .t::>

13.13. The pemsa; cf these contradictions 1e§ga;%[L%g;a:[%g1¢%

wimesses stated before the ¥)O1iC€ 31CA}>VGL1f' the  aé.Sg{u}t 

with the specific Weapons an the the 

in the evidence before the they §V'ta.§e&.j}Tf1atV"'£:Ijik;=:*j»;"'d:id 1161' V

say so before the investigating:.C*ﬁ(:€1*;'-~.._Wh<:ii  Hiany as six
persens, Wctre assau1te€i'"b},:-  eiéci;As;e{i,V it is practicaiiy

impossible for the _7.vitne:ééés to"zfémembgsr, G; recellect as '£0

which of the;  <:a§;§eii.. azaseiixlt 011 which portion of the _

body. in Vﬂ}'z€._'i1:a;t?e:, the contradictiozi markeé at
ElX.D.1 i<;§«DL.'I=3    In the circrumstances, E

h()1C1 i:¥1éﬁi  the' 1;3€:§iti:3:1ef;*s have not maria {mt any gmuncis to:

 :"§i1:5*. i:::§,erfer&I1c6.

 '=~'20;'1i%1;;:'s;:':1;is com sits in the revision against the

j c0:1c{1,:jré':1: Vfmdings, it is :m€:ess,a}:°y fer the petitioners ta

"'V.:L*aS1,ai2.1isi.i§"'an error apparent an the fans: of tha }i'&€:O1'é at any

--  S?u:c:§:'AA'ii2<:ga]it§r in appreciating the eviscience, The yetiﬁencrs

" 'hé;iv¢ 119: mania out any suzrh grauncis to haézi that the 3§udgm:::1t

and ordszr passmi by the Courts belaw are ﬁlega} and pervarse.

Tbs Scope of the révisian is iimited and in View 0f 33%

A

 



cmzcurrent ﬁndings, no ground is; made out to .v;?a1'rant

irﬁerference. In the circumstances, taking into ccﬁ§id&z}éi'tion

the nature of the oifencﬁ and the fact that two- 'c}:{" 

have sustained fractures, the impris:.Gnment"' Oi;E V&V yggar'

awarded by the 'Trial Court and ;"¥.h€7 f13:iVe 'bf

masonabie anci groper. In t}1§3""{§iI'(31I1i1Staj1C€V:§§ lV._:a*;§:s.w:er th'e 

point in negative and prqcecd to_.§é's3 inc fo1.iowi11g:_ §
A     --

The revisiQzi'i.s'éi;<;:iiié§seQ§i. jV11ciVgz;r3:?.§ﬁt and order of the

courts béléiw'  The ﬂCZou1"t is directed to secufe
the pr€§€I1£2C (if. aVV<":c1:iS:=, c'lV._.t0 undarge the S€'2{1'€EI},C€. Tha
accused a1'£§:Li3nfivtled'__té'~s& uzmcltzr Sciatica 428 C-:¢.P.C~

 .....
1216.99 .,;rLW " A
Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court

Paramesha S/O Ramanna vs State By Nonavinakere Police on 1 June, 2009
