- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100178 OF 2023 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. HUCHCHAPPA KAREPPA SAGANUR AGE: 53 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, 2. CHULACHAPPA VITTAL MULIMANI @ MALLUR, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, 3. RAMESH KAREPPA NAGANUR @ SAGNUR, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, 4. KRISHNA HANAMANT BIJIAGATTI AGE: 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, ALL ARE RESIDENT OF NANDIHAL, TQ. RAMDURG, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI, PIN-591123. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI T.R. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY RAMDURGA P.S., REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, V N BADIGER Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.04.19 10:31:12 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH DHARWAD, PIN 580011 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 397 R/W. 401 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.C.NO. 215/2016 ON THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, RAMDURG AND RECORDS IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 09/2022 FROM THE FILE OF THE IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE BELAGAVI AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.12.2021 PASSED IN C.C.NO. 215/2016 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, RAMDURG, CONVICTING THEM FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/SECTIONS 143, 148, 341, 324, 326, 504 R/W. 149 OF IPC AND ALSO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.03.2023 PASSED IN CRL.APPEAL NO. 09/2022 PASSED BY THE IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESISONS JUDGE BELAGAVI CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION OF THE TRIAL COURT AND ACQUIT, THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1, 2, 5 AND 6 OF THE OFFENCE WITH WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN CONVICTED AND SENTENCED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri.T.R.Patil, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.Praveen Y. Devareddyavar, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State/respondent. 2. Accused persons who have suffered an order of conviction in CC No.215/2016 dated 15.12.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 341, 324, 326 and Section 504 read with Section 149 of IPC and sentenced as under is the revision petitioners: “The accused are found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 341, 324, 326 and 504 R/w. 149 of I.P.C. Acting under Section 248(2) of Cr.P.C. the accused are convicted for the above offences. The accused are sentenced to undergo a simple imprisonment for a period of one month each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 143 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, they shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 10 days each. The accused are further sentenced to undergo a simple imprisonment for a period of three months each and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 148 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, they shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 The accused are also sentenced to undergo a simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months each and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 324 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, they shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1 month. The accused are also sentenced to undergo a simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years each and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 326 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, they shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months. The accused are also sentenced to undergo a simple imprisonment for a period of 2 months each and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 504 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, they shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days. The sentence of imprisonment imposed above shall run concurrently. Each of the accused has to pay the fine amount of Rs.17,000/-. Office is to collect total fine amount of Rs.68,000/- from the accused. The bail bond of the accused and surety taken during trial period stands canceled. The bail bond of the accused and surety taken as per Sec. 437-A of Cr.P.C. will be in force for 6 months from today. Acting under Section 357 Cr.P.C, out of fine amount, an amount of Rs.30,000/- shall be given to P.W.2; Rs.10,000/- each shall be given to P.W.1, P.W.5 and C.W.5 (since C.W.5 died, the amount of Rs.10,000/- is to be given to P.W.5 who is the wife of C.W.5); the remaining amount of Rs.8,000/- is to be remitted to the state after appeal period.” - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 3. Validity of the said judgment was confirmed in Crl.A.No.09/2022 dated 28.03.2023. 4. Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the revision petition are as under: 4.1. Based on the complaint lodged by Tippanna Lakkappa Saganur, police conducted investigation and filed charge sheet against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Section 143, 148, 341, 324, 326, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC. Among the accused persons, two accused persons were juvenile and they were tried before the Juvenile Justice Board. 4.2. In the complaint averments itself it is stated that on 18.10.2015 at about 9.30 a.m. at the path way situated in the agricultural land bearing Sy.No.134 of Suresh Rangappagouda Naik @ Karigoudar situated at Nandihal Village in Ramdurg Taluka, accused persons formed unlawful assembly and committed raid with the aid of deadly weapons like axe, stone and in the incident, they - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 pushed Tippanna Lakkappa Saganur and Prakash Lakappa Saganur. Juvenile accused – Ramesha @ Ramanna assaulted on forearms of C.W.5 with iron rod and Yallappa another juvenile, assaulted Prakash Lakappa Saganur with iron rod. Accused No.3 voluntarily assaulted on the left shoulder and left side buttock of Yamanavva. 5. After due trial, learned Trial Magistrate convicted the accused persons and sentenced as referred to supra. 6. Being aggrieved by the same, accused filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.9/2022. 7. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records, heard the arguments of both the parties in detail and on reappreciation of the material on record, confirmed the judgment of the learned Trial Judge and maintained the sentence passed by the learned Trial Judge. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 8. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court, in this revision. 9. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner at the outset would contend that both the Courts have not properly appreciated the material evidence placed on record and rightly convicted the accused and sought for allowing the revision petition. 10. Alternatively, he would contend that taking note of the relationship among the parties and taking note of the fact that accused are middle aged persons and they have no criminal antecedents, sought for modification of the sentence. 11. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the revision grounds by contending that case of the prosecution has been established beyond all reasonable doubt and wound certificate marked at Exs.P.3 to 6 would sufficiently establish the injuries and sought for dismissal of the revision petition. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 12. Insofar as alternate submission is concerned, learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that accused persons are not entitled for any leniency as they have mercilessly attacked P.W.1, 2 and 5. 13. Having heard the parties in detail, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 14. On such perusal of the material on record, it is crystal clear that there is a voluntarily assault caused by the accused persons against the complainant party. In the process, P.W.1, 2 and 5 have sustained injuries as per the wound certificate as referred to supra. 15. However, to maintain the order of conviction under Section 326 of IPC, insofar as injuries that have been caused to Tippanna Lakkappa Saganur, Prakash Lakkappa Saganur and Yamanavva Lakkappa Saganur, the wound certificate itself would not depict that injuries are grievous in nature. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 16. However, learned Trial Magistrate while discussing material facts in the impugned judgment, taking note of the fact that P.W.2 has sustained fracture injuries in the right leg and classified it as grievous injury. 17. No x-ray film or radiological report is filed along with the wound certificate of P.W.2. Therefore, conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC cannot be sustained in view of the principles of law enunciated in the case of State v. Sheenappa Gowda reported in (2011) 4 KCCR 2759. 18. Accordingly, conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC needs to be set aside. 19. Insofar as remaining offences are concerned, they are not compulsorily punishable with sentence of imprisonment. Hence, enhancing the fine amount in a sum of Rs.25,000/- payable by each of the accused persons, if the sentence of imprisonment is modified by - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 directing the revision petitioners to undergo simple imprisonment for a day till the rising of the Court and portion of the fine amount if paid as compensation in a sum of Rs.50,000/- to P.W.2 and sum of Rs.10,000/- to P.W.1 and 5, would meet and ends of justice. 20. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. Revision petition is allowed in part. ii. Conviction of the revision petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC is set aside and they are acquitted for the said offence. iii. For the remaining offences, conviction is confirmed. iv. Sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court is modified as under: a. Accused/revision petitioners are directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a day till rising of the Court and to pay fine amount of Rs.25,000/- on or before 30.04.2025. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5835 CRL.RP No. 100178 of 2023 b. Out of the fine amount recovered, sum of Rs.50,000/- is ordered to be paid as compensation to P.W.2 – Prakash Lakkappa Saganur and sum of Rs.10,000/- to P.W.1 and 5 who have suffered simple injuries. v. Failure to pay the enhanced fine amount, would result in automatic restoration of the order passed by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court. vi. Office is directed to return the Trial Court Records with copy of this order forthwith for issue of modified conviction warrant. SD/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 11