Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 11141

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
G Basavaraja, J
Raju – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1865 OF 2024

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Harish N.R.
For the Respondents: N. Anitha Girish

A conviction for assault causing grievous injury cannot be sustained when medical evidence fails to corroborate the specific weapon used, diagnostic reports confirming fractures are absent, and the prosecution relies solely on biased, interested witnesses amidst a pre-existing civil property dispute.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 323, 326, 307 read with Section 34 - Criminal Appeal - Conviction and sentence by Trial Court for offences under Sections 323 and 326 - Appeal against acquittal for Section 307 and conviction for 323 and 326 - Prosecution failed to prove the attribution of specific injuries to accused via weapons - Reliance on interested witnesses without corroboration - Discrepancies between medical evidence and witness statements - Non-production of required medical reports (X-ray) to sustain grievous injury finding - Benefit of doubt in favor of accused. (Paras 13, 37, 48, 50, 51)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Evidence - Interested witnesses - Court must exercise caution when relying solely on witnesses who share personal enmity with the accused especially regarding property disputes - Testimony must be natural, consistent, and substantiated by independent evidence. (Paras 45, 48)

Facts of the case:
Prosecution alleged that the accused committed offences under Sections 323, 326, and 307 IPC arising from a property and house vacation dispute. The trial court convicted the appellants for Sections 323 and 326 while acquitting them of Section 307. Appellants challenged the conviction, arguing that injuries were self-inflicted from falling rather than assault with weapons, noting the absence of corroborative medical evidence and the use of interested witnesses to build a false case.

Findings of Court:
The Court found that the prosecution's case was riddled with inconsistencies. The medical records did not substantiate that the injuries were caused by the specific weapons mentioned. Furthermore, the investigating agency failed to produce essential diagnostic reports like X-rays to confirm the alleged fractures, and the testimony of key witnesses was deemed unreliable due to obvious bias stemming from the ongoing property litigation.

Issues: Whether the Trial Court's conviction under Sections 323 and 326 was based on credible, consistent evidence and whether the injuries sustained by the complainant could be definitively attributed to the alleged assault by the accused.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the prosecution evidence is inconsistent, medical reports fail to corroborate the alleged mode of injury, and the testimony relies exclusively on interested parties involved in a civil dispute, it is unsafe to record a conviction. Non-production of primary medical evidence regarding fractures creates a reasonable doubt which must benefit the accused.

Result: Appeal allowed; the judgment of conviction and order of sentence are set aside and the appellants are acquitted.

Table of Content
1. procedural history, charges framed, and factual background of the dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. nature of appellate arguments regarding evidentiary contradictions and trial court errors. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
3. summary of prosecution evidence and testimony of witnesses. (Para 11 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
4. appreciation of evidence, benefit of doubt, and determination of reasonable doubt. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51)

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT TUMAKURU IN S.C.NO.97/2022 DATED 25.09.2024 CONVICTING APPELLANTS FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHALBE UNDER SECTION 323, 326 R/W. SECTION 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL, WITH COST.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 09.01.2026, COMING ON FOR “PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT” THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

CAV JUDGMENT

The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’) in S.C.No.97/2022 dated 25.09.2024.

2. The parties herein are referred to as per their rank before the trial Court.

3. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that, Kyathasandra Police have submitted the charge sheet against the accused for the offence under Sections 323, 326, 307 r/w Section 34 of IPC. It is alleged by the prosecution that accused no.1-Raju alias Raja and accused no.2 Nagaraja, CW2-Shruthi C.S. and CW3-Revanna alias Ravi are cousins. Three years prior to the date of incident, accused nos.1 to 3 were residing in the house constructed in land bearing Sy.No.11/4 of Kyathasandra Village belonged to CW2. On 23.08.2021 at 03.30 p.m. CW2-Shruthi C.S. along with CW1-Srinvas Gowda, CW3-Revanna alias Ravi and CW4-Ganesha went near the house situated at Chowdaiahnapalya and asked the accused to vacate the house. For that, accused threatened that if CW1 to CW4 do not register the house in the name of accused, they would kill them one by one and get the property. Thereafter, with an intention to commit murder, accused no.1 brought chopper from the house and chased CW1 to kill him and assaulted on his left leg, shank and toe of left foot and caused grievous injuries to him. Accused no.2 assaulted CW1 with club on his head and caused grievous injuries to him and accused no.3 and scratched CW2 on her body with hands by making her to fall on the ground who came to pacify the quarrel and caused simple injuries to her. On thorough investigation, the I.O. has submitted the charge sheet against the accused.

4. After filing the charge sheet, case was registered in CC.No.21096/2021. Thereafter case was committed to the Court of Sessions and registered in SC.No.97/2022. The accused were enlarged on bail.

5. Upon hearing on charges, the trial Court has framed the charges for the alleged commission of offence. Same were read over and explained to the accused. Having understood the same accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. To prove the guilt of the accused, in all, 17 witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW17. Twenty documents were marked as Ex.P1 to P20. Six material objects were marked as MO1 to 6. On closure of prosecution side evidence, statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C was recorded. Accused had totally denied the evidence of prosecution witnesses and they have specifically stated that they have not committed any offence as alleged and a false complaint has been filed against them. They have filed a complaint, but police did not receive the same.

7. On behalf of the accused, one Lakshmi Kantharaju alias L.K.Raju is examined as DW1 and one document is marked as Ex.D1. Having heard the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 11141

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKAG Basavaraja, JRaju – AppellantVersusState of Karnataka – RespondentCRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1865 OF 2024

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
G Basavaraja, J
Raju – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1865 OF 2024