- 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