- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1127 OF 2013(C) BETWEEN: 1. SHIVAKUMAR S/O K.K. ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURIST R/O KADUMANE VILLAGE HANUBALU HOBLI SAKALESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT -573 134 2. K.K. ERAPPA S/O LATE KUMARPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURIST R/O KADUMANE VILLAGE HANUBALU HOBLI SAKALESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 134 3. HOOVAMMA S/O K.K. ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O KADUMANE VILLAGE, HANUBALU HOBLI SAKALESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT -573 134 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI UMESH.P.B FOR SRI RAVINDRA B DESHPANDE, ADVOCATES) Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SAKALESHPURA RURAL POLICE STATION – 573 134 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER ) THIS CRL.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.11.2013 PASSED BY THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN IN S.C.NO.50/2011 - CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.1 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 504, 324 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE AND THE CONVICTING THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NOS.2 AND 3 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 504, 323 R/W 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri Umesh P.B. on behalf of Sri R.B.Deshpande, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Channappa Erappa, learned High Court Government Pleader. 2. De facto complainant being the wife of accused No.1 and daughter in law of accused No.3 is present before the Court. Accused No.2 said to have died during pendency of the appeal. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013 As such, appeal stands dismissed as abated as against appellant No.2. 3. Having heard the parties in detail, it is noticed that after the present case came to be filed, there was a matrimonial proceedings between de facto complainant and appellant No.2 which ended in dissolution of marriage between them. Appellants have been convicted and sentenced in S.C.No. 50/2011 dated 07.11.2013 on the file of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Hassan, as under: “Accused No.1 is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000-00, in default to undergo S.I. for three months for the offence punishable under Section 498(A) of Indian Penal Code. Accused No.1 is further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.10,000-00, in default to undergo S.I. for one month for the offence punishable under Section 504 of Indian Penal Code. Accused No.1 is further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.20,000-00, in default to undergo S.I. for three months for the offence punishable under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013 Accused Nos.2 and 3 are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.10,000-00 each, in default to undergo S.I. for two months for the offence punishable under Section 504 of Indian Penal Code. Accused Nos.2 and 3 are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000-00 each, in default to undergo S.I. for 15 day for the offence punishable under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code. Total fine amount payable is Rs.72,000-00. Out of this, Rs.60,000/- be paid over to P.W.1 towards compensation and balance of Rs.12,000-00 is ordered to be confiscated to the State. Accused No.1 is entitled for benefit under Section 428 Criminal Procedure Code.” 4. Taking note of the development in the matter, especially the decree of divorce being granted by the competent Court, keeping sentence intact would not be beneficial to the de facto complainant or for the accused. Instead, if the fine amount is enhanced in a sum of Rs.50,000/- which can be paid as compensation to the de facto complainant by setting aside the imprisonment, ends of justice would be met. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013 5. Learned High Court Government Pleader has no objection for modification of the sentence subject to payment of the enhanced fine amount. 6. Placing the submission on behalf of the appellants as well as the learned High Court Government Pleader and submission made by the de facto complainant, following Order is passed: ORDER (i) Criminal Appeal is allowed in part. (ii) While maintaining the conviction of the appellants for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 324, 323 of the Indian Penal Code, sentence of imprisonment ordered as against appellant No.1 stands set-aside by enhancing the fine amount in a sum of Rs.50,000/-. Fine imposed by the Trial Court said to have been deposited before the Trial Court. (iii) Time is granted to deposit the entire enhanced fine amount till 30th March 2025. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013 (iv) After receipt of the fine amount, entire enhanced fine amount in a sum of Rs.50,000/- is ordered to be paid as compensation to P.W.1/de facto complainant under due identification. (v) It is made clear that enhanced sum of Rs.50,000/- compensation is being paid in addition to the compensation of Rs.60,000/- awarded by the Trial Court. (vi) Office to return the Trial Court Records forthwith along with copy of this judgment for issuing modified conviction warrant. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13