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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 20610

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
V Srishananda, J
Nanjaiah – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
CRL.RP No. 1101 of 2018



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Chandrashekara K A
For the Respondents: K.Nageshwarappa

A conviction for grievous hurt under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code requires clinical proof supported by radiological evidence like X-rays or CT scans; in the absence of such objective confirmation, the offence must be scaled down to Section 324.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - S. 326 and S. 324 - Grievous hurt - Requirement of radiological evidence - Prosecution failed to produce X-ray or CT scan reports to substantiate allegation of fracture - Conviction for S. 326 set aside and scaled down to S. 324.

Facts of the case:
Petitioners were convicted by the Trial Magistrate for various offences including S. 326 of IPC, initiated following a verbal altercation and assault incident in 2007. The conviction was upheld by the First Appellate Court. Petitioners sought revision, contesting primarily the conviction under S. 326 due to lack of radiological evidence.

Findings of Court:
The court held that without X-ray or CT scan reports to confirm fractures, a charge of grievous hurt under S. 326 cannot be sustained. Conviction was modified to S. 324 IPC. Considering the lapse of time since the incident, the court sentenced the petitioners to imprisonment for the day and enhanced the fine amount to be paid as compensation to the victims.

Issues: Whether the conviction under S. 326 IPC is sustainable in the absence of original radiological evidence/X-ray reports to prove grievous injury.

Ratio Decidendi: In criminal cases, the burden of proving grievous injury lies on the prosecution; clinical examination alone is insufficient for a S. 326 conviction without supporting radiological confirmation such as an X-ray or CT scan report.

Result: Revision petition allowed in part; conviction for S. 326 set aside and substituted with S. 324; sentence modified to imprisonment for the day with enhanced fine.

Table of Content
1. procedural history of the conviction and appeal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. factual background and procedural trial history. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
3. summary of rival contentions regarding sufficiency of evidence. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
4. requirement of x-ray evidence for section 326 ipc. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
5. modification of sentence and fine structure. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42)

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 05.04.2012 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., GUNDLUPETE IN C.C.No.305/2008 AND CONFIRMED BY THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.12.2017 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHAMARAJANAGARA (SITTING AT KOLLEGALA) IN CRL.A.No.22/2012 AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 326 AND 504 R/W 149 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri K.A.Chandrashekara, learned counsel for the revision petitioners and Sri K.Nageshwarappa, learned High Court Government Pleader.

2. Revision Petitioners are the accused persons who suffered an order of conviction in C.C No.305/2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 326, 504 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced as under:

“In exercising powers conferred in the Section 248(e) of Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused No.1 to 6 are hereby convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 326, 504 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code.

The accused No.1 to 6 shall go simple imprisonment for a term of 3 months for the offences punishable u/S 143 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC.

The accused No.1 to 6 shall go simple imprisonment for a term of one year for the offences punishable u/S 147 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC.

The accused No.1 to 6 shall go simple imprisonment for a term of two years for the offences punishable u/S 148 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC.

The accused No.1 to 6 shall pay fine amount of Rs.1,000/- each for the offences punishable u/S 341 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC. In default of paying of fine amount, they shall go simple imprisonment for a term of 15 days.

The accused No.1 to 6 shall go simple imprisonment for a term of six months for the offences punishable u/S 323 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC.

The accused No.1 to 6 shall go simple imprisonment for a term of three years and pay fine amount of Rs.5,000/- each for the offences punishable u/S 326 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC. In default of paying fine amount they shall go simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

The accused No.1 to 6 shall go simple imprisonment for a term of six months for the offences punishable u/S 504 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC.

Out of collecting the fine amount Rs.25,000/- shall be go to PW1 and 2 as a compensation amount for the injuries sustain by them in the incident. Remaining fine amount is to be confiscated to Government.

The surety bond and accused bonds are stands cancelled.”

3. Order of the learned Trial Magistrate was challenged before the First Appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No.22/2012 and the learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records, heard the arguments of the parties in detail and on re-appreciation of the matter law on record, by considered judgment dated 19.12.2017, dismissed the appeal.

4. Thereafter, revision petitioners are before this Court.

5. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are asunder:

In respect of an incident said to have occurred on 25.12.2007, at about 03.30 p.m. in Honnegowdanahalli, in front of Community Hall, accused persons said to have formed an unlawful assembly holding deadly weapons like sticks, stones and wooden c

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 Back to top