Karnataka High Court
Shanthaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:43351
CRL.A No. 261 of 2014
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 261 OF 2014
BETWEEN:
SHANTHAIAH S/O CHITTAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/O MADAKI VILLAGE,
ALANDA TALUK,
GULBURGA DISTRICT-585 302.
(SPLIT UP ACCUSED NO.3 IN S.C.NO.53/2002)
(ACCUSED BEFORE SESSIONS COURT)
(NOW IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY)
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. UMESH.D.B., ADV. FOR SRI. RAVINDRA B
DESHPANDE, ADV.)
AND:
Digitally signed
by THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
SHARADAVANI
B HIRIYUR POLICE STATION
Location: High (DY. S.P. HIRIYUR SUB-DIVISION, HIRIYUR-572 143.
Court of
Karnataka (COMPLAINANT BEFORE SESSIONS COURT)
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. RANGASWAMY.R., HCGP)
THIS CRL.A. FILED U/S. 374(2) CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:19/26.2.14 PASSED BY THE ADDL.
DIST., AND S.J., AND SPL. JUDGE (SC/ST (PA) ACT),
CHITRADURGA IN SPL.C.NO.15/12 - CONVICTING THE
APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 148,
324, 504 R/W 149 OF IPC AND ETC.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:43351
CRL.A No. 261 of 2014
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
The appellant/accused No.3 has preferred this appeal against judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (SC/ST (PA) Act), Chitradurga in Special Case No.15/2012 dated 19/26.02.2014.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their status before the trial Court.
3. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that the Dy.S.P., Hiriyur Sub-Division, Hiriyur, has submitted charge sheet against the accused Nos.1 to 8 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 324, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'SC/ST (PA) Act, 1989'). It is alleged by the prosecution that on 06.08.2001 at afternoon 1.00 p.m., -3- NC: 2025:KHC:43351 CRL.A No. 261 of 2014 HC-KAR PWs.1 to 9 and other female members who are President and Members of various Women's Self-Help Organization had held procession demanding to close arrack and wine shops in and around the Adivala village and accordingly procession was coming in front of the shop of Ravi Wines at Adivala village and thereafter the other accused in S.C.No.53/2002 who are acquitted along with this accused, came in Jeep and Car by holding deadly weapons like Iron rods, clubs, cycle chain and etc., and suddenly attacked on PWs.1 to 9 and other female members of the said organizations and also abused with reference to caste of PWs.1 to 9 and thus attempted to commit the murder and if the present accused and other accused succeeded in their attempt, the death would have been caused. Therefore, with this allegation complaint was lodged as per Ex.P2.
4. After investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted the charge sheet against accused for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 324, 307 -4- NC: 2025:KHC:43351 CRL.A No. 261 of 2014 HC-KAR read with Section 149 of IPC and under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST (PA) Act, 1989. The accused appeared before the Special Court and obtained bail. The trial Court has framed the charges against this accused for the alleged commission of offences and explained to the accused, for which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. To prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined 17 witnesses as PWs.1 to 17 and 23 documents were got marked at Exs.P1 to P23 and material objects at M.Os.1 to 8. On closure of prosecution evidence, the statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., was recorded. Accused has totally denied the evidence of prosecution. However, he has not chosen to lead any defence evidence on his behalf but he has specifically stated that false case is filed against him and has not committed any offence.
6. Having heard the arguments of both sides, the trial Court has convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 504 read -5- NC: 2025:KHC:43351 CRL.A No. 261 of 2014 HC-KAR with Section 149 of IPC. Being aggrieved by this judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court is contrary to law, evidence and probabilities of the case. The Investigating Officer has submitted charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 8 for the alleged commission of offences, the present appellant who was accused No.3 was separated from the charge sheet as he was absconding. In his absence, the trial Court has acquitted all the other accused for the alleged commission of offences as per judgment dated 20.12.2005. When the other accused have acquitted from the alleged offences, then the question of committing offence by this accused alone for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC, does not arise. Charge is also not properly framed by the trial Court. None of the witnesses have specifically stated the name of the present accused in -6- NC: 2025:KHC:43351 CRL.A No. 261 of 2014 HC-KAR committing the offence. However, the trial Court has convicted the accused without any evidence. The State has not preferred any appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed in S.C.No.53/2002 dated 20.12.2005. However, the trial Court has convicted the accused for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC, which is not sustainable under law. On all these grounds, prays to allow this appeal.
8. Learned HCGP submits that the trial Court has properly appreciated the evidence on record and passed the impugned judgment and contends that there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence and sought for dismissal of the appeal.
9. I have heard the arguments and perused the materials placed before me. The following points would arise for consideration.
1) Whether the appellant has made out a ground to interfere with the impugned -7- NC: 2025:KHC:43351 CRL.A No. 261 of 2014 HC-KAR judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court?
2) What order?
My answer to the above points are as under:
Point No.1: Affirmative
Point No.2: As per Final Order
10. I have examined the materials placed before this Court. The Investigating Officer has submitted charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 8 for the commission of offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 324, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC and under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(x), 3(1)(xi) of SC/ST (PA) Act, 1989. Among them, the present accused No.3-Shanthaiah was separated from charge sheet as he was absconding and trial was conducted against accused Nos.1, 2, 4 to 8 in S.C.No.53/2002 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga. In that case, the prosecution has examined the same witnesses - PWs.1 to 17 and 23 -8- NC: 2025:KHC:43351 CRL.A No. 261 of 2014 HC-KAR documents were marked and same material objections were also marked, which are marked as MOs.1 to 8. The trial Court has appreciated the evidence on record in detail and acquitted accused Nos.1, 2, 4 to 8 for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 324, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC and under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(x), 3(1)(xi) of SC/ST (PA) Act, 1989.
11. Learned HCGP has fairly submitted that the State has not preferred any appeal against judgment of acquittal passed in S.C.No.53/2002. The trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence on record and has not assigned any reasons in the judgment that how accused No.3 is responsible for the commission of offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 324, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC, when other accused Nos.1, 2, 4 to 8 are acquitted by the same Court in S.C.No.53/2002. This Court has carefully examined the materials on record. Even on re-appreciation of evidence on record also, I do not find any cogent convincing corroborative evidence to -9- NC: 2025:KHC:43351 CRL.A No. 261 of 2014 HC-KAR prove the guilt of the accused for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 324, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC. When all other accused acquitted for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 324, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC and under Sections 3(2)(v), 3(1)(x), 3(1)(xi) of SC/ST (PA) Act, 1989, the question of committing the offence by this accused alone does not arise. Viewed from any angle, the judgment of the trial Court is not sustainable under law. The appellant has made out a ground to interfere with the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. Hence, the above points are answered in 'Affirmative' and I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed;
(ii) The judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (SC/ST (PA) Act), Chitradurga in
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:43351 CRL.A No. 261 of 2014 HC-KAR Special Case No.15/2012 dated 19/26.02.2014 is set aside;
(iii) The appellant/accused No.3 is acquitted for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 324 read with Section 149 of IPC.
(iv) The fine amount, if any, deposited by the accused No.3/appellant shall be refunded to him;
(v) Registry is directed to send copy of this judgment along with TCRs to the trial Court.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 92