Back
2025 Supreme(Kar) 584
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
Madegowda S/o Doddathammegowda - Appellant
Versus
K.C. Raju S/o Chengappa K.M. - Respondent
Criminal Revision Petition No. 1601 of 2024
Decided On : 06-06-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Renukaradhya R.D.
For the Respondent: B.N. Jagadeesha
The appellate court held that an acquittal must be based on a proper assessment of evidence, and errors in evaluation necessitate remanding the case for fresh consideration.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, Sections 114, 143, 147, 148, 447, 323, 324, 506 read with 149 - Appeal against acquittal - The Sessions Court set aside the trial court's acquittal and remitted the matter for fresh consideration due to insufficient evaluation of evidence. (Paras 1, 5, 39)
(B) Acquittal - Legal Standard - The appellate court must ensure that the trial court has assessed evidence properly without legal errors; significant evidence was ignored regarding the injuries suffered by complainant. (Paras 5, 31)
(C) Rights of the accused - Bail - Accused’s bail continues until trial court reconsiders the case. (Para 39)
Facts of the case:
The respondent filed a complaint registered as C.C.No.840/2015, leading to acquittal for the accused persons. An appeal was filed against this acquittal, arguing that material evidence was not adequately acknowledged by the trial court.
Findings of Court:
The appellate court identified multiple errors in the conviction process and necessitated a fresh hearing.
Issues: Whether the acquittal was justified and whether the trial court's evaluation of evidence was sufficient.
Ratio Decidendi: The appellate court found the trial court's assessment lacking, especially regarding witness testimonies and medical evidence, which warranted a remand for proper adjudication.
Result: Appeal allowed; trial court judgment set aside.
ORDER :
1. This petition by respondent No.1 in Crl.A.No.28/2022 is directed against the impugned order dated 27.02.2024 passed in Crl.A.No.28/2022 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru, whereby the appeal filed by respondent No.1-appellant was allowed by the Sessions Court, which set aside the judgment of acquittal dated 02.03.2020 passed by C.C.No.840/2015 and remit the matter back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional SPP for respondent No.2 and perused the material on record.
3. For the proposed order, notice to remaining respondents is dispensed with.
4. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent No.1 – complainant filed the instant complaint, which was registered as C.C.No.840/2015 against the petitioner/accused and other accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 114 , 143, 147, 148, 447, 323, 324, 506 read with 149 of IPC. The said proceedings have been contested by the petitioner/accused No.1 and the Trial Court proceeded to pass the order dated 02.03.2020 acquitting the petitioner and all other accused persons. Aggrieved by the said order of acquittal, respondent No.1/complainant/victim filed an appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C., which was allowed by the First Appellate Court vide impugned order dated 27.02.2024 thereby setting aside the order of acquittal and remitting the matter back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. While arriving at the said conclusion, First Appellate Court held as under:
“1. Being aggrieved by the Judgment of acquittal dated 02.03.2020 of C.C.No.840/2015 passed by the learned JMFC-IV, Mysuru, the Appellant/Complainant has preferred the appeal under Sec.372 of Cr.P.C.
2. The brief facts of the case of the Prosecution is as hereunder:
On the basis of the complaint filed by one Sri.K.C.Raju a case in Cr.No.106/2009 is registered against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sec.114, 143, 147, 148, 447, 324 and 506 R/w Sec.149 of IPC., After completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer filed the charge- sheet against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sec.114, 143, 147, 148, 447, 323, 324 and 506 R/w Sec.149 of IPC. The Trial Court framed charges, the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The Prosecution examined in all ten witnesses as PWs-1 to 10 and as many as 9 documents came to be marked as per Ex.P-1 to 9 and the material object as per MO.1. The 313 Cr.P.C., statement came to be recorded.
3. After hearing both the side, the Trial Court framed the following Points for consideration:
1.Whether the Prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on 06.05.2009 at about 12 noon, at site belonging to Skanray Technologies, situated at Hebbal Industrial Area, accused persons in furtherance of their common object, formed unlawful assembly and thereby committed an offence punishable U/sec.143 r/w Sec.149 of I.P.C. ?
2.Whether the Prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the aforesaid date, time and place, accused persons in furtherance of their common object, made galata with CW.1 and thereby committed an offence punishable U/sec.147 r/w Sec.149 of I.P.C.?
3.Whether the Prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the aforesaid date, time and place, accused persons in furtherance of their common object, armed with deadly weapons made galata with CW.1 and thereby committed an offence punishable U/sec.148 r/w Sec.149 of I.P.C.?
4.Whether the Prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the aforesaid date, time and place, accused persons in furtherance of their common object, trespassed into the said site of CW.1 and thereby committed an offence punishable U/sec.447 r/w Sec.149 of I.P.C.?
5.Whether the Prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the aforesaid date, time and place, accused persons in furtherance o
