- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3105 CRL.RP No. 200024 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 200024 OF 2021 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SMT. JAGADEVI @ GOURAMMA W/O BABURAO, NOW AGED: 45 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O FILTERBED, ASHRAYA COLONY, KALABURAGI TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI 585101 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANIL KUMAR NAVADAGI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE THROUGH, STATION BAZAR POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI, TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI, BY THE ADDL. SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH-585103. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA M. MALIPATIL, HCGP) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W SEC.401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 15.11.2018 OF I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KALABURAGI IN C.C.NO.3471/2010 CONVICTING THE PETITIONER HEREIN FOR OFFENCES U/SEC.465, 471, 468, 419 AND 417 OF IPC AND SENTENCING HERE SI FOR A PERIOD OF Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3105 CRL.RP No. 200024 of 2021 ONE YEAR WITH FINE OF RS.1000/- FOR OFFENCE U/SEC.465 OF IPC, SI FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR WITH FINE OF RS.1000/- FOR OFFENCE U/SEC.471 OF IPC, SI FOR A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS WITH FINE OF RS.2000/- FOR OFFENCE U/SEC.468 OF IPC, SI FOR A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS WITH FINE OF RS.1000/- FOR THE OFFENCE U/SEC.419 OF IPC,SI FOR A PERIOD OF 6 MONTHS WITH FINE OF RS.1000/- FOR OFFENCE U/SEC.417 OF IPC WITH DEFAULT STIPULATION AND CONSEQUENTLY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER ATED DATED 08.12.2020 PASSED BY I ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KALABURAGI IN CRL.APPEAL NO.80/2018 CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 15.11.2018 OF I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KALABURAGI AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO ACQUIT THE PETITIONER OF ALL THE CHARGES FOR WHICH SHE WAS CONVICTED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri. Anilkumar Navadagi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State. 2. The accused is the revision petitioner who has suffered an order of conviction in C.C.No.3471/2010 confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.80/2018. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3105 CRL.RP No. 200024 of 2021 3. For the proved offence, accused has been sentenced by the trial Magistrate as under: ORDER Acting U/Sec. 248 (2) of Cr.P.C., the accused is convicted for the offence punishable U/Sec. 465 of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I. for 1 year and pay fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo S.I. for 7 days. Acting U/Sec. 248 (2) of Cr.P.C. the accused is convicted for the offence punishable U/Sec. 471 of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I. for 1 year and pay fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo S.I. for 7 days. Acting U/sec. 248 (2) of Cr.P.C. the accused is convicted for the offence punishable U/Sec. 468 of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I. for 3 years and pay fine of Rs.2,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo S.I. for 15 days. Acting U/Sec. 248(2) of Cr.P.C., the accused is convicted for the offence punishable U/Sec.419 of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I. for 2 years and pay fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo S.I. for 7 days. Acting U/Sec. 248 (2) of Cr.P.C., the accused is convicted for the offence punishable U/Sec. 417 of IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I. for 6 months and pay fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo S.I. for 7 days. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3105 CRL.RP No. 200024 of 2021 All the sentences shall run concurrently. The period of judicial custody undergone by the accused, shall be set-off against imprisonment imposed on him as per Sec. 428 of Cr.P.C. Furnish a free copy of this judgment to the accused forthwith. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence, the accused is before this Court. 5. Sri. Anilkumar Navadagi, learned counsel, reiterating the grounds urged in the revision petition, vehemently contended that, the accused/revision petitioner was not made known about the consequences of signing an affidavit as Balamma to stand as a surety for the accused in C.C.No.3012/2008, however, based on the surety affidavit, accused was enlarged on bail and later on accused in the said case got absconded and surety proceedings were commenced. At that juncture, it is noticed that, the revision petitioner impersonated herself as Balamma and gave fake documents to stand as a surety for the accused in the said case. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3105 CRL.RP No. 200024 of 2021 6. Thereafter, the revision petitioner was convicted and she was in custody for a period of eight days and taking note of the fact that, the accused is a rustic villager, this Court may consider the custody period already undergone by the accused as a period of imprisonment for the aforesaid offence by enhancing the fine amount, reasonably. 7. Per contra, learned HCGP Sri.Veeranagouda M. Malipatil, supports the impugned orders and submits that, the action attributable to the revision petitioner is cheating the Court itself and therefore, such plea should not be shown any leniency and sought for dismissal of the revision petition in toto. 8. Having heard the arguments of both sides, it is seen that, the accused is the first time offender. Admittedly, she is a rustic villager. What made her to sign the surety affidavit as Balamma and to furnish records which were standing in the name of Balamma for the purpose of standing as a surety for the accused in C.C.No.3012/2008 is not spelt out by the accused. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3105 CRL.RP No. 200024 of 2021 9. Nevertheless, it is settled principles of law that the ignorance is no bliss and therefore, having regard to the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction this Court is of the considered opinion that, the order of conviction recorded by the trial Magistrate, confirmed by the first appellate Court, needs no interference. 10. But taking note of the fact that, the accused is a lady and she is the first time offender and was in custody for a period of eight days and now aged about 51 years, ends of justice would be met by directing the accused to pay enhanced fine amount of Rs.30,000/- by setting aside the remaining period of sentence of imprisonment. 11. Hence, the following order: ORDER (i) The revision petition is allowed in part, while maintaining the conviction order dated 15.11.2018 passed in C.C.No.3471/2010 by the learned I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC at Kalaburagi, confirmed by the I Additional District and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3105 CRL.RP No. 200024 of 2021 Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi, in Criminal Appeal No.80/2018 dated 08.12.2020; (ii) The custody period of eight days already undergone by the accused is treated as the period of imprisonment for the aforesaid proved offence by enhancing the fine amount of Rs.30,000/-; (iii) Time is granted till 20.07.2025 for payment of enhanced fine amount, failing which she shall undergo the imprisonment as ordered by the trial Magistrate; (iv) Office is directed to send back the trial Court records with copy of an order forthwith for issue of modified conviction order. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66