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

- 1 -

CRL.A No. 100512 of 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

AND

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T. G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100512 OF 2021 (A)

BETWEEN:

STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR

RATTIHALLI POLICE STATION,

HIREKERUR CIRCLE,

HAVERI DISTRICT HAVERI

THROUGH THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE,

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH. .. APPELLANT

(BY SRI.V.M.BANAKAR, ADDL.SPP)

AND:

CHANDRAPPA SANNATAYI S/O. BHARAMAPPA

AGE. 30 YEARS, OCC. NIL

R/O. KAMALAPUR VILLAGE,

TQ. HIREKERUR, DIST. HAVERI-581110. .. RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.S.P.KANDAGAL, AMICUS CURIAE)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S 378(1) AND (3) OF

CR.P.C., SEEKING TO GRANT LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST JUDGMENT

AND ORDER ACQUITTAL DATED 12.02.2019 PASSED BY THE II

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT HAVERI (SITTING

AT RANEBENNUR) IN SESSIONS CASE NO.80/2017, AND TO SET

ASIDE THE

AND

ORDER OF

ACQUITTAL

DATED

12.02.2019 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND

SESSIONS JUDGE AT HAVERI (SITTING AT RANEBENNUR) IN

SESSIONS CASE NO.80/2017, AND TO CONVICT AND SENTENCE THE

RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 323,

307, 504 AND 506 OF IPC.

ANNAPURNA

CHINNAPPA

DANDAGAL

Digitally signed by

ANNAPURNA

CHINNAPPA

DANDAGAL

Location: HIGHCOURT

OF KARNATAKA-

DHARWAD BENCH

Date: 2023.03.28

11:02:02 +0530

- 2 -

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY,

T.G.SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The State has challenged the judgment of acquittal

dated 12.02.2019 passed in S.C.No.80/2017 by the Court

of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Haveri (Sitting

at Ranebennur) (the ‘Trial Court’ for short).

2.

For the sake of convenience, the parties shall

be referred to as per their status in the Trial Court.

3.

Briefly

stated

the

facts

are

that,

PW-

3/Hanumanthappa Sannatayi is a senior citizen aged 70

years; he runs a petty shop in front of his house at

Kamalapur village of Hirekerur taluk. On 12.03.2017 in

the midnight at about 12 o’clock, PW-3 was sleeping on

the pial of his house, at that time, the accused herein

came to him, made him to wake up asking him to provide

him beedi from his shop. Since PW-3 was in deep sleep,

he had refused to wake up and provide beedi to accused,

as it was late night. By the said act of PW-3, accused got

- 3 -

enraged and he threatened PW-3 that how he will allow

him to sleep without providing him beedi and insulted him

in a filthy language. Thereafter, PW-3 woke up and went

to attend nature call near drainage situated besides his

house. The accused in prosecution of his enragement

picked up a stone, went behind PW-3 with an intention to

commit his murder, thrown the stone on the head of PW-3

and made attempts to commit his murder. Due to assault,

PW-3 was fallen on the ground with head and facial

injuries. The accused escaped from the spot by

committing criminal intimidation.

4. PW-2/Bharamappa Sannatayi, who is the son of

PW-3,

came

to

know

about

the

incident.

PW-

4/Chandrappa Hardalli, PW-5/Ganeshappa Sannaanji, PW-

6/Nagarajappa Doddaanaji, PW-7/Kamalamma Sannatayi,

PW-8/Malatesh

Tumminakatti

and

PW-9/Chandrappa

Vaddar, the fellow villagers rushed to the spot, rescued

PW-3 and taken him to hospital. On the complaint of PW-

2, the law was set into motion in Crime No.30/2017 of

- 4 -

Rattihalli Police Station. PW-14/Hanumanthappa Kambali

is the Investigating Officer, who has investigated the

matter and brought the accused before the court for trial.

On committal by the Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C.,

Hirekerur in C.C.No.156/2017, the Principal District and

Sessions

Judge,

Haveri,

registered

the

case

in

S.C.No.80/2017 and assigned the matter to the II

Additional District and Sessions judge at Haveri sitting at

Ranebennur, for trial.

5. The accused stood for trial for the offences

punishable under Sections 323, 307, 504 and 506 of IPC

by pleading not guilty of the charges. The prosecution

placed the oral evidence of PWs-1 to 15, marked Exs.P1 to

P13 and M.Os.1 and 2. After examining the accused and

hearing both sides, the trial court has passed the

impugned judgment holding that the accused is not guilty

and acquitted him of all the charges. Aggrieved by the

order of acquittal, the State has filed this appeal.

- 5 -

6. We have heard the arguments of Sri.V.M.Banakar,

learned Additional SPP for the appellant/State and

Sri.S.P.Kandagal,

learned

Amicus

Curiae

for

the

respondent/accused.

7. It is the contention of the learned Additional SPP

that the prosecution examined the injured as PW-3. His

testimony is supported by PWs-4, 7 to 9, who are the

eyewitnesses to the incident and the injury suffered by

PW-3 has been certified by PW-10/Dr.Shamshad Begum.

Though the incident took place in the midnight, the

evidence of PW-11/Shashidhara.E.B., Engineer of HESCOM

would point out that there was an electricity supply at the

time of incide

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top