- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5087 CRL.A No. 1411 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1411 OF 2023 (C) BETWEEN: 1. MUNIRAJU S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 2. GANGARAJU S/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT SUNNAGHATTA VILLAGE KUNDANA HOBLI DEVANHALLI TALUK BENGALURU – 562 138 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SRIKANTH B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY VISHWANATHAPURA POLICE STATION BENGALURU REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU -560 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI RAHUL RAI.K, HCGP) THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 374(2) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 30.06.2023 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-III, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN SPL.C.NO.39/2018, FOR THE Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5087 CRL.A No. 1411 of 2023 OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 504 AND 506 R/W 34 OF IPC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri Srikanth B., learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Rahul Rai K., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent. 2. Appellants are the accused Nos.1 and 2 who have suffered an order of conviction in Special Case No.39/2018 on the file of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court – III, Bengaluru, have preferred this appeal. 3. Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the appeal are as under: Complainant Muniyamma filed a complaint before Vishwanathapura Police on 26.10.2017 at about 8.00 p.m., contending that she is the resident of Sunnaghatta village and she was a building construction worker. It is her case that she has four children and second daughter is the victim and they belonged to Adikarnataka caste. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5087 CRL.A No. 1411 of 2023 4. It is further contended that second daughter of the complainant (hereinafter referred to as the ‘victim’) was studying in Government High School in 8th standard at Sunnaghatta at the relevant point of time and when they had been to coolie work, accused who is the son-in-law of the Talavaru Narasimhappa, a married person residing in the same village, visiting the house of the complainant frequently from January, 2017 onwards and had illicit relationship with the victim under threat. 5. Because of such illicit physical relationship, victim became a pregnant of eight months and the incident was reported to the brother of the accused Mr. Gangaraju. Accused No.1 and 2 instead of accepting the guilt, started abusing the complainant by taking out the caste name so as to degrade them in the public view. 6. Based on such complaint, Vishwanathapura police registered a case in Cr.No.219/2017 and after thorough investigation, filed the charge sheet for the offences punishable under Section 376 (2) (i) (f), 504 and 506 r/w Section 34 IPC and under Section 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (‘POCSO’ for short). - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5087 CRL.A No. 1411 of 2023 7. On receipt of charge sheet, presence of accused persons were secured and charges were framed. Accused pleaded not guilty. Therefore, trial was held. 8. After due trial, learned Trial Judge convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 504 and 506 IPC and acquitted the accused for other offences and sentenced as under: “Accused No.1 and 2 are sentenced to undergo S.I for 1 year for the offence U/s 504 of IPC and further the accused No.1 and 2 are directed to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each in default of payment of fine they shall under go S.I. for 3 months. Further Accused No.1 and 2 are sentenced to undergo S.I for 2 years for the offence U/s 506 of IPC and further the accused No.1 and 2 are directed to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each in default of payment of fine they shall under go S.I. for 3 months. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. Out of the fine amount, if it is deposited. Rs.15,000/ be paid to the victim girl i.e. P.W.1 in terms of Sec.357(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. The remaining amount of Rs.5,000/- be confiscated to the state U/s 357(1)(a) towards defraying expenses. Office is hereby directed to supply free copy of the judgement to the accused No.1 and 2 herein. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5087 CRL.A No. 1411 of 2023 Further, office is directed to send a copy of the findings and sentence imposed in this case to District Magistrate as required u/s.365 of Cr.P.C. The period of judicial custody under gone by the accused is given a set-off U/s 428 of Cr.P.C Issue a conviction warrant accordingly.” 9. Being aggrieved by the same, appellants are before this Court. 10. Sri Srikanth B., learned counsel for the appellants reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum contended that in the absence of any appeal being filed by the State in acquitting the appellants for the rest of the offences, for the offences punishable under Section 504 and 506 IPC is concerned, custody period already undergone by the appellants may be treated as period of imprisonment by enhancing the fine amount reasonably and allow the appeal to that extent. 11. Per contra, Sri Rahul Rai, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the appeal grounds and contended that very fact of appellants abusing the complainant in filthy language and giving life threat, having been established and therefore, appeal is to be dismissed in toto. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5087 CRL.A No. 1411 of 2023 12. Having heard the parties in detail, perused the material on record meticulously. 13. On such perusal of the material on record, especially in view of the alternate submission made by the counsel for appellants only with regard to the sentence, the sole point that would arise for consideration in this appeal is: Whether the sentence ordered by the learned Trial Judge needs modification? 14. In the case on hand, admittedly, there was a physical relationship between first appellant and victim. Victim became pregnant of eight months and at that juncture, the panchayath was held by the complainant and accused No.2. Accused No.2 being the elder brother of accused No.1, at that juncture, both the appellants said to have abused the complainant and her daughter in filthy language and also gave life threat. 15. Taking note of the material evidence placed on record, the learned Trial Judge acquitted the appellants for the rest of the offences which has become final in the absence of any appeal filed by the State. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:5087 CRL.A No. 1411 of 2023 16. Material evidence also clearly establish that the appellants belonged to a different caste than the caste of the victim. Moreover, first accused being already a married person, there was no remedy left for the complainant and victim and at that juncture, complaint came to be filed. 17. It is highly unimaginable that mother of the victim girl (complainant) did not notice for pregnancy of her daughter till eight months. All these factors ultimately resulted in acquittal of the appellants for the remaining offences which has become final in the absence of any further appeal either by the victim or by the State. 18. Therefore, taking note of the fact that appellants are convicted only for the offence punishable under Section 504 and 506 IPC, custody period already undergone by each of the appellants is to be treated as period of imprisonment for the aforesaid offences by enhancing the fine amount in a sum of Rs.25,000/- each and enhanced fine amount if paid as compensation to the victim, ends of justice would be met. Accordingly, the sole point is answered in the affirmative and following order is passed: - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:5087 CRL.A No. 1411 of 2023 ORDER (i) Appeal is allowed in part. (ii) While maintaining the conviction of the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 504 and 506 IPC, custody period already undergone by the appellants is treated as period of imprisonment by directing the appellants to pay enhanced fine amount of Rs.25,000/- each to be paid by the accused on or before 10th March 2025, failing which they shall undergo simple imprisonment as ordered by the learned Trial Judge in the impugned judgment. (iii) After payment of enhanced fine amount, sum of Rs.50,000/- (inclusive of the compensation already ordered by the learned Trial Judge) shall be paid as compensation to the victim – P.W.1, under due identification. (iv) Office is directed to return the Trial Court Records along with copy of this order. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR, List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1