IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100189 OF 2020 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS))

BETWEEN:

IRAPPA S/O NIJALINGAPPA SHIVASHIMPAR, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: ABBIGERI, TQ: RON, DIST: GADAG-582209.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. D.V.PATTAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ANAND R. KOLLI, ADVOCATES)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CHAN DRASHEKAR DHARWAD, THROUGH PSI, LAXMAN NAREGAL POLICE-580011.

KATTIMANI …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR THE CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 LAXMAN KATTIMANI OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS Date: 2026.02.24 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, 16:51:03 +0530 AT GADAG IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.32/2014 DATED 04/09/2019 THERE BY CONFIRMING THE ORDER PASSED BY PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RON IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.119/2014 DATED 16/08/2014 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/SEC.323, 324, 354, 506 R/W 34 IPC, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)

Heard arguments of Sri D.V.Pattar for Sri Anand R.Kolli, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Praveena Y.Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent.

2. Petitioner has suffered an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 323, 324, 354, 506 read with Section 34 IPC in C.C.No.119/2014 and sentenced as under:

“The accused No.1 and 2 are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of one month for the offence punishable U/s.323 of IPC.

The accused No.1 and 2 are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of four months for the offence punishable U/s.324 of IPC.

The accused No.1 and 2 are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of three months for the offence punishable U/s.354 of IPC.

The accused No.1 and 2 are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of two months for the offence punishable U/s.504 of IPC.

The accused No.1 and 2 are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of four and half months for the offence punishable U/s.506 of IPC.

All the sentences shall run concurrently.”

3. Validity of the conviction and sentence was questioned before the First Appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No.32/2014.

4. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records, heard the arguments of both sides and by re-appreciating the material on record, dismissed the appeal.

5. Being aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court in this revision on following grounds.

 “The order of the trial court and the 1st appellate court had not appreciated the material evidence on the record wherefore the impugned order of conviction is bad in law. Hence same may kindly be set aside in the interest of justice.

 The Hon'ble trial court had failed to appreciate the evidence though all the prosecution witnesses are not supported completely in the case of the prosecution And it is always well settled principle under the criminal jurisprudence that if there is any material evidence regarding no corroboration of all the witnesses the benefit of doubt always towards the accused hence the both the courts had committed a serious miscarriage of justice in convicting the petitioner Wherefore the order of conviction may kindly be set aside in the interest of justice.

 It is submitted the Hon’ble trial court and the 1st appellate court had acquitted the petitioner for the offence punishable U/S 498(a) and convicted the other offences. But on perusal of the entire complete averments and the evidence the main allegation regarding demanding of dowry but however they fail to prove beyond the reasonable doubt. Wherefore the impugned order may kindly be set aside in the interest of justice.

 It is further submitted that the Hon'ble trial court and the 1st app