Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
RAJESH RAI K.
Sarvanamma @ Sarvamangala, W/o Neelakantegowda – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
judgm
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH RAI K, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.02.2024 passed in S.C.No.107/2008 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Hassan (for brevity, "the learned Sessions Judge"), whereby learned Sessions Judge convicted accused No.1 i.e., appellant No.1 for the offences punishable under Section 323 of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for brevity, "the 1989 Act") and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC and further sentenced to undergo S.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months, for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the 1989 Act and, also convicted accused No.2-appellant No.2 for the offences punishable under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.
-
2. The factual matrix of the prosecution case is that -
On 07.06.2008 at about 5 p.m. at Neeragunda Village, when PW.2 - Ru
Credibility of witness testimony is critical, as inconsistencies and reliance on interested parties undermine the prosecution’s case, especially amid ongoing civil disputes.
The importance of prompt lodging of FIR in criminal cases and the need for evidence to establish the presence of the public at the time of the offense to satisfy the criteria of 'public view' under S....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and significant inconsistencies in witness statements can lead to acquittal.
Court affirmed convictions for assault under IPC but reversed those for attempted murder and caste-based abuse due to lack of evidence, emphasizing intent and corroborative testimony.
A conviction under the SC/ST Act requires conclusive proof of intentional insult based on caste; mere verbal disputes over monetary issues do not fulfill this requirement.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of prompt lodging of reports to avoid embellishments and afterthoughts, as well as the need for a proper explanation for any delay i....
The absence of corroborative evidence renders the sole testimony insufficient for conviction under criminal law.
The court held that reliance on inconsistent and insufficient witness testimonies, alongside lack of medical evidence for grievous injuries, invalidates the conviction, necessitating acquittal.
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
