SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 19878

PRINCIPAL BENCH AT BENGALURU
MALLANAIKA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.RP 1056 2015



- 1 -

NC: 2023:KHC:23907

CRL.RP No. 1056 of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1056 OF 2015

BETWEEN:

1.

MALLANAIKA

S/O KAVADE MALLANAIKA

AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS

RESIDENT OF PALYA VILLAGE

KOLLEGAL TALUK

CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT.

2.

MANJUNATHA

S/O MALLANAIKA

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS

RESIDENT OF PALYA VILLAGE

KOLLEGAL TALUK

CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. TRIVIKRAM., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY KOLLEGAL RURAL POLICE STATION

CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT

REPRESENTED BY

THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

HIGH COURT BUILDINGS. …RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI., ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.RP FILED U/S.397 AND 401 CR.P.C BY THE

ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE

COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED

17.01.2015 PASSED IN C.C.NO.494/2010 BY THE PRL. CIVIL

JUDGE AND JMFC, KOLLEGAL CONFIRMED IN JUDGMENT

Digitally

signed by

SHAKAMBARI

Location:

HIGH COURT

OF

KARNATAKA

- 2 -

NC: 2023:KHC:23907

CRL.RP No. 1056 of 2015

DATED 16.09.2015 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.5/2015 BY THE PRL.

DIST. AND S.J., CHAMARAJANAGARA AND ACQUIT THE

PETITIONERS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS

DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This Revision is preferred by accused nos. 1 and 2 being

aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence passed

against them as per the judgment dated 17.01.2015 by the

Prl.Civil Judge and JMFC, Kollegal finding them guilty of

offences punishable under SEc.504, 323, 326, 506 read with

Sec.34 of IPC with a direction to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for the

offence punishable under Sec.504 r/w.Sec.34 of IPC and in

default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for 30 days, further

directed to pay Rs.500/- for the offence under section 323 r/w.

34 of IPC and in default of payment of fine, to undergo SI for

30 days and directed to undergo SI for 30 days further to under

SI for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500 each and in

default, to undergo SI for 30 days and also directed them to

pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in default to undergo SI for 30 days

for the offence under Sec.506 r/w.Sec.34 of IPC.

- 3 -

NC: 2023:KHC:23907

CRL.RP No. 1056 of 2015

2. Parties to this petition are referred to as per their rank

before the trial Court for the purpose of convenience.

3. Heard the arguments of both the side.

4. The said judgment of conviction and sentence was

challenged by the petitioners by preferring criminal appeal

No.5/2015

before

the

Prl.District

and

Sessions

Judge,

Chamarajanagara, wherein, the said judgment of conviction

and sentence was confirmed by the First Appellate Court. Now

the petitioners are before this Court challenging both the

judgments of their conviction and sentence by filing this

revision.

5. Complainant-injured lodged a complaint against

accused persons as per Ex.P1 stating that he was the resident

of Jaraganahalli village, Kollegal Tq. It is stated that about two

months prior to the incident, accused nos. 1 and 2 dug up a

borewell in a Government land which is by the side of land of

the

accused

at

Palya

Village.

Complainant-Nagaraju,

S/o.Kalashetty objected for the same and submitted a petition

before the Tahsildar. Thereafter, the Tahsildar conducted the

spot inspection and forfeited the said borewell.

- 4 -

NC: 2023:KHC:23907

CRL.RP No. 1056 of 2015

6. It is alleged in the complaint that on 14.4.2010, at

about 5.30 p.m. when complainant was regulating water to his

lands, both the accused persons came there and abused him in

filthy and indecent language threatened him to take his life.

Mallanaika, assaulted with the club on his chest and

Manjunatha assaulted on hand, made the complainant to fall

down. They treaded him, threatened to kill him. In the said

inciden

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top