1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 665/2012

BETWEEN

SIDDARAJU

S/O CHIKKANNAIAH

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS

R/A HANGINAVALU VILLAGE

NANJANGUDU TALUK

MYSORE DISTRICT

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI MANJAPPA N D, ADVOCATE -ABSENT)

AND

STATE BY NANJANAGUDU RURAL POLICE

REP. BY ITS

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI VINAYAKA.V.S, HCGP)

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C

PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF

CONVICTION OF SENTENCE AND FINE OF RS.10,000/-

WITH DEFAULT OF SENTENCE PASSED ON 25.01.2012 IN

C.C.NO.129/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE

& JMFC, NANJANGUD AND JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED

2

12.04.2012 PASSED BY THE PRL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS

JUDGE, MYSORE IN CRL. APPEAL NO.41/2012.

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON

FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

Case called twice, there is no representation on behalf

of the Revision Petitioner. However, learned counsel for

the Revision Petitioner addressed the arguments on his

behalf on 04.12.2021.

2.

Heard Sri Vinayaka V.S., learned High Court

Government Pleader for the respondent and perused the

records.

3.

This Revision Petition is filed by the accused,

who suffered an order of conviction in C.C.No.129/2008,

on the file of the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Nanjangud

by Judgment dated 25.01.2012, whereby he has been

convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 324

and 326 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to

undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years

3

and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, with default sentence of six

months simple imprisonment, which was modified in

Criminal Appeal No.41/2012 by reducing sentence to two

years rigorous imprisonment and fine is reduced from

Rs.10,000/- to Rs.5,000/-, by judgment dated 12.04.2012.

4.

Brief facts of the case are as under:

On 13.08.2007 at about 4.00 p.m. at Haginavalu

Village, near the land of Devaraju near the kaggala tree,

accused persons came together and when cutting the

fence put up by the complainant and when questioned by

the complainant, all the accused persons wrongfully

restrained the complainant and voluntarily inflicted injury

with club and whereby the complainant sustained grievous

injury and approached the police for taking action against

the accused persons.

5.

The jurisdictional police after registering the

case, investigated the matter in detail and filed charge

sheet against the accused persons for the offences

4

punishable under Sections 341, 326, 324 and 323 read

with Section 34 of IPC.

6.

The presence of the accused persons were

secured before the learned Magistrate and charge was

recorded. Accused pleaded not guilty and as such, trial was

held.

7.

In order to prove the case of the prosecution,

prosecution in all examined 9 witnesses as PWs.1 to 9 and

relied on 4 documentary evidence which were marked and

exhibited as Exs.P1 to 4 and one material object namely

club as MO.1.

8.

On conclusion of the prosecution evidence,

accused statements as contemplated under Section 313

Cr.P.C was recorded, wherein accused persons denied all

the incriminatory materials and did not choose to examine

themselves or place their version about the incident on

record in writing as is contemplated under Section 313(5)

Cr.P.C.

5

9.

Thereafter,

learned

Magistrate

heard

the

parties in detail and after considering the oral and

documentary evidence on record, passed an order of

conviction against accused No.1 and acquitted the accused

Nos.2 and 3 for the aforesaid offences and sentenced as

aforesaid. State did not file appeal against the acquittal of

accused Nos.2 and 3 and therefore, as against accused

Nos.2 and 3, the order of the Trial Magistrate became

final.

10.

Being aggrieved by the same, accused No.1

preferred an appeal in Crimina