IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.798 OF 2014 (C)

BETWEEN:

1. ANANDAKRISHNA, S/O RAMALINGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS

2. VEERESHA S/O CHANNE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS BOTH ARE R/O B. SHETTI HALLI VILLAGE, NAGAMANGALA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 427.

…APPELLANTS (BY SMT. ARCHANA MURTHY P., ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE BY NAGAMANGALA RURAL Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N POLICE STATION Location: High Court of Karnataka REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT, BANGALORE 01 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B. LAKSHMAN, HCGP)

THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:23..7.2014 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA, IN SPL.C.NO.33/12 - CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.1 & 3 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 504,323,324 R/W 34 OF IPC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Appellants herein, i.e., accused 1 and 3, have preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 23^rd July 2014, Special Case No.33 of 2012 by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mandya (for short "the trial Court").

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their status and rank before the trial Court.

3. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mandya Sub-division, Mandya submitted charge-sheet against accused for the offence punishable under Sections 506, 504, 324, 323 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "SC/ST (PoA) Act"). It is alleged by the prosecution that on 15^th December, 2011 at about 3.00 pm, accused 1 and 3 joined together in furtherance of their common intention, had been to survey No.62 of Government Gomal land at B. Shettihalli and when the complainant questioned with regard to ploughing the land as it has been earmarked for graveyard, the accused abused him as “ºÉƯÉAiÀÄ £À£Àß ªÀÄUÀ£É” by taking his caste and told him that the land does not belong to his father, it belongs to them and thereby they are ploughing it. Accused No.3 instigated accuse No.1 not to leave the complainant, belongs to schedule caste, and humiliated in public view being well aware that he belongs to schedule caste community and even assaulted him on his forehead with a stone. Accused No.3 assaulted him and pushed him to the land, dragged and tore his baniyan and voluntarily caused simple injury and also threatened with dire consequences by committing criminal intimidation. Thereby, the accused have committed the alleged offences. Accused are enlarged on bail.

4. Upon hearing on charges, the trial Court framed charges and the same were read over and explained to the accused. Having understood the same accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined seven witnesses as PWs1 to 7 and marked eight documents as Exhibits P1 to P8 and five material objects were marked as MOs1 to 5. On closure of prosecution side evidence, statements of the accused under section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded. Accused have denied the incriminating evidence appearing against them, but they did not choose lead any defence evidence on their behalf. Having heard the arguments on both sides, the trial Court acquitted Accused 1 and 3 for offence punishable under Section 506 read with 34 of Indian penal code and section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (PoA) Act. Trial court convicted the accused 1 and 3 for the offence punishable under Sections 504, 323, 324 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months with fine of ₹2,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 504 read with 34 Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo s