Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
R.NATARAJ, RAJESH RAI K.
Bhimanna, S/o. Bharamu Chipparagi – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka, by CPI Athani Circle, Athani, Represented By The Additional SPP, High Court Of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
(RAJESH RAI K., J.)
This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 06.02.2023 and order of sentence dated 07.02.2023 passed in Sessions Case No.393/2017 by the VII Addl. Sessions Judge, Belagavi, Sitting at Chikkodi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned Sessions Judge’), whereby the learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Section s 341 , 504 and 302 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of five days for the offence punishable under Section 341 of IPC . He further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.2,500/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Evidentiary value of eyewitness testimony can support a conviction even if the witness is related to the victim, provided the testimony is credible and corroborated by additional evidence.
The conviction under Section 302 of IPC was upheld due to circumstantial evidence demonstrating motive and opportunity, proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The conviction for murder under Sec. 302 IPC can be sustained based on the testimony of a sole eyewitness, provided the evidence is credible and corroborated, and the intent to kill is established th....
The court affirmed that eyewitness testimony, corroborated by forensic evidence, established the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt for murder and intimidation.
The court affirmed that consistent eyewitness testimony and established motive are critical in upholding a murder conviction under IPC Section 302.
The testimony of a sole eye-witness can suffice for conviction if credible and corroborated by medical evidence, even if the extra-judicial confession is weak.
A conviction under Section 302 IPC can be upheld based solely on the testimony of the informant if corroborative evidence exists, even in absence of independent witnesses.
The higher evidentiary value of injured eyewitness testimony and the principle that minor contradictions in eyewitness testimonies, which do not go to the root of the matter, cannot be considered mat....
Section 299 relates to causing death by doing an act with intention of causing death or with intention of causing bodily injury as is likely to cause death.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article