SANDEEP NAGARAJ vs KARTHIK RAMANUJAM

O R D E R

Leave granted .

During the course of hearing, learned Senior Advocat e appearing for respondent no. 1 - Karthik Ramanujam accepts that th e impugned judgment/order, discharging the said respondent, cannot b e sustained. He, however, submits that at best, a charge unde r Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code, 18601 should be framed .

We have examined the facts of the case including th e statement made by one of the injured – Sandeep Nagaraj (th e appellant). It is an accepted position that the appellant has los t one eye. As per the prosecution, the eye was lost when the injure d victim was hit by the buckle of a belt. In fact, the assertion mad e is that it was forcibly and deliberately done. However, we woul d not like to undertake detailed examination and record reasons, as a very limited issue arises before us for consideration. Further , this would be a matter of evidence produced during trial .

Taking into account the allegations made by the prosecution , 1 For short, “IPC” .

we are of the opinion that the impugned judgment/order cannot b e sustained and the trial Court had rightly framed the charge unde r Sections 307 and 326 of the IPC, which would be in alternative, i n addition to Sections 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of th e IPC .

The facts noticed and our order do not reflect any fir m opinion on the merits of the case. We clarify that this order ha s been passed only on the question of framing of charge. The tria l court will independently examine the evidence led, without bein g influenced by this order .

The impugned judgment/order is set aside and the appeal i s allowed and disposed of in the above terms .

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of .

..................J .

(SANJIV KHANNA )

..................J .

(DIPANKAR DATTA )

NEW DELHI ;

JANUARY 05, 2024 .

ITEM NO.31 COURT NO.2 SECTION II- C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDING S Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 13370/202 3 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-07-202 3 in RP No. 486/2023 passed by the High Court of Karnataka a t Bengaluru )

SANDEEP NAGARAJ Petitioner(s )

VERSU S KARTHIK RAMANUJAM & ANR. Respondent(s )

(IA No. 203647/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. )

Date : 05-01-2024 This matter was called on for hearing today .

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANN A HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATT A For Petitioner(s) Mr. T.S. Shanthi, Adv .

Mr. Narendra Kumar, Adv .

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv .

Mr. T.R.B. Sivakumar, AO R For Respondent(s )

Mr. Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv .

Ms. Pallavi Pratap, AO R Mr. K. Aggarwal, Adv .

Mr. Devesh Mohan, Adv .

Mr. V. N. Raghupathy, AO R Mr. Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv .

Mr. M. Bangaraswamy, Adv . Mr. Premnath Mishra, Adv .

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the followin g

O R D E R

Leave granted .

The appeal is allowed and disposed of in terms of the signe d order .

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of .

(DEEPAK GUGLANI) (R.S. NARAYANAN )

AR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRA R (signed order is placed on the file )