DT:22.7.11

PASSED

BY

ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE, FAST TRACK COURT PUTTUR, D.K., IN

CRL.A.NO.59/10 AND RESTORE THE ORDER PASSED IN C.C.NO.

Digitally signed by

NAGARATHNA M

Location: HIGH

COURT OF

KARNATAKA

- 2 -

2523/06 DATED:30.4.2010 PASSED BY THE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND

JMFC, PUTTUR D.K.-CONVICTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR

THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 3 AND 4 PUNISHABLE

UNDER SEC.12(1)(a) AND (b) OF KARNATAKA MOTOR VEHICLE

TAXATION ACT,1957.THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO

PAY A FINE OF RS.9,360-00 WELL AS TO PAY THE TAX AS

DEMANDED BY THE R.T.O. FOR RS.9,360-00 FOR THE PERIOD FROM

1.2.2000 TO 31-7-04 IN DEFAULT TO PAY FINE AND TAX AMOUNT,

HE SHALL UNDERGO SI FOR 2 MONTHS.

IN CRL.A NO.984/2011

S/O MONTA GOWDA,

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.378(1) & (3) CR.P.C BY THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

DT:22.7.11

PASSED

BY

ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE, FAST TRACK COURT PUTTUR, D.K., IN

CRL.A.NO.58/10 AND RESTORE THE ORDER DATED:30.4.2010

PASSED BY THE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PUTTUR D.K. IN

C.C.NO.715/08 -CONVICTING THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED FOR THE

OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 3 AND 4 PUNISHABLE

- 3 -

UNDER SEC.12(1)(a) AND (b) OF KARNATAKA MOTOR VEHICLE

TAXATION ACT,1957.THE RESPONDENT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO

PAY A FINE OF RS.3,300-00 AS WELL AS TO PAY THE TAX AS

DEMANDED BY THE R.T.O. FOR RS.3,300-00 FOR THE PERIOD FROM

1.8.04 TO 31-1-06 IN DEFAULT TO PAY FINE AND TAX AMOUNT, HE

SHALL UNDERGO SI FOR 2 MONTHS.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE

COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Since both appeals arise out of a common order, they are taken

up together, heard and disposed of by this common order.

2. The two appeals arise out of the judgment of acquittal

passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Puttur,

Dakshina Kannada, dated 22.07.2011 in Crl.A.No.58/2010 and

Crl.A.No.59/2010 wherein the judgment and order of conviction

passed

by

learned

Addl.

Civil

Judge

&

JMFC,

Puttur

in

C.C.No.715/2008 and C.C.No.2523/2006 dated 30.04.2010 were set-

aside and the accused is acquitted for the offence punishable under

section 12(1) (a) of Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957(for

short 'KMVT Act').

3. The brief case of the prosecution is that the respondent

accused is the registered owner of Ambassador Car bearing No.KA-

19-4245 which is a transport passenger taxi. The respondent was

required

to

pay

quarterly

tax

of

a

sum

of

Rs.3,300/-

(C.C.No.715/2008) for the period from 1.08.2004 to 31.01.2006 and

- 4 -

Rs.9,360/-(C.C.No.2523/2006) for the period from 01.02.2000 to

31.07.2004. But, the respondent did not pay the tax for the

aforementioned periods and he was called upon to pay the tax by

issuing notice, inspite of which, he did not deposit the tax. Thereby,

he committed an offence under section 12(1) (a) of KMVT Act.

Hence, the R.T.O., Puttur filed a charge sheet before the Court.

4. In order to prove the case, the prosecution examined Sri. Seva

Naik, the Regional Transport Officer, Puttur as PW-1 and got marked

four documents as Ex-P1 to P4. After recording 313 Cr.P.C.

statement and after hearing the arguments, the learned JMFC

convicted the accused. Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred

Crl.A.No.58/2010

and

Crl.A.No.59/2010,

wherein

the

learned

Sessions Judge allowed the appeals and set-aside the judgment of

conviction and acquitted the accused. Aggrieved by the judgment and

order of acquittal, these two appeals are filed by the State.

5. Heard Smt. K.P. Yashodha., learned HCGP for the appellant and

Sri. T. Hareesh Bhandary, learned counsel for the respondent in both

the appeals.

6. Learned HCGP argued that the impugned judgment of acquittal

passed by learned sessions Judge is illegal and contrary to law.

Learned Sessions Judge has not considered the provisions of sections

4, 6 and 9 of the KMVT Act which is a Special Act and it is for the

- 5 -

respondent to establish that he was not in possession of the ve