SUNIL S/O BHAGAVANDAS SAUDAGAR v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
CRL.RP/200095/2021 · 2025-06-11
V Srishananda
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 12529 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 12529 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3016 CRL.RP No. 200095 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.200095 OF 2021 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN:
SUNIL S/O BHAGAVANDAS SAUDAGAR, AGE:26 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O. METTAR GALLI, KALABURAGI, DIST. KALBURAGI- 585102.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI SHIVASHARANA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH STATION BAZAR POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI, DIST. KALABURAGI, R/BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH. …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA M. MALIPATIL, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO, ALLOW THE REVISION PETITION AND ORDER DATED 21.12.2020 IN CRL.A.
NO.52/2019 PASSED BY I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT KALABURAGI IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED 29.07.2019 PASSED IN C.C.NO.1087/2012 BY LEARNED
Digitally signed by RENUKA Location:
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3016 CRL.RP No. 200095 of 2021
IV ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT KALABURAGI MAY KINDLY BE SET ASIDE.
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 Shivasharan Reddy, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent.
2. Revision petitioner is the accused who suffered an order of conviction in C.C.No.1087/2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 332, 353, 504 read with Section 34 IPC, which was confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.52/2019.
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that the injured was in civil dress and therefore, the question of attracting the offences punishable under Sections 332 and 353 of IPC would not
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3016 CRL.RP No. 200095 of 2021
arise at all, which has been ignored by both the Courts and therefore, conviction of the revision petitioner/accused for those two counts must be set aside.
4. In the alternative, he would submit that in the event of this Court upholding the order of conviction, taking note of the fact that fine of Rs.10,000/- has already been paid by the petitioner, enhancing the fine amount, balance period of imprisonment may be set aside, by enhancing the fine amount reasonably.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader disputes the grounds urged in the revision petition and contented that knowing fully well that the injured is a police constable, the petitioner has high handedly interfered with his discharging public work and also abused and assaulted him. Therefore, conviction and sentence needs to be confirmed.
6. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously.
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3016 CRL.RP No. 200095 of 2021
7. On such perusal of the material on record, incident is a stray incident. Petitioner is eking out livelihood by cleaning the public toilet in Ghazipur, Kalaburagi.
8. Taking note of the fact that petitioner is a first time offender and he has already spent 10 days in custody, treating the custody period as imprisonment, by enhancing the fine amount, would meet the ends of justice.
9. Accordingly, following:
ORDER a) Criminal revision petition is allowed in part. b) While maintaining the conviction of the revision petitioner/accused for the offence under Sections 332, 353, 504 read with Section 34 of IPC, the custody period of 10 days already undergone by the accused is treated as period of imprisonment, by directing the accused to pay enhanced fine
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3016 CRL.RP No. 200095 of 2021
amount of Rs.10,000/- on or before
15.07.2025. c) Failure to pay the enhanced fine amount, the sentence of imprisonment as ordered by the learned Trial Judge confirmed by the First Appellate Court shall stand restored automatically. d) Office is directed to return the Trial Court records with copy of this order for issuance of modified conviction warrant.
Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE
SRT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 80 CT:PK