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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36153

MADASHETTY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


This appeal is filed by the accused/appellant under

Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (8Cr.P.C.9 for

short) challenging the judgment of conviction dated 20.06.2011

passed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru

in Special Case No.77/2008, whereby the learned Sessions

Judge has convicted the accused for the offence punishable

under Section 138(1)(a) of the Electricity Act ,2003 ( Electricity

Act9 for short), Section 429 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (8IPC9

for short) and Section 51 of Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (

8WLP Act9 for short).

2.

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are

referred with the original ranks occupied by them before the

trial Court.

3.

The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, the

accused is the owner of the land in Chikkabaragi of H.D. Kote

Taluk. On 16.03.2008, PW.7-M.Mahadevaiah, working as Forest

3

Guard was on patrolling duty and when he was proceeding from

Chikkbaragi to Doddabaragi along with CW.3-Devaraju, he

found that some eagles flying over the land of accused and as

such, he went there and found a dead elephant. He also

noticed that the solar fence has been put-up around the land

of the accused an

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top