- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6125 CRL.RP No. 100049 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100049 OF 2017 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. NAGAPPA S/O. KENCHAPPA HALAVAGALA, AGE: 64 YEARS, 2. HANUMANTHAPPA S/O. NAGAPPA HALAVAGALA, AGE: 40 YEARS, 3. KRISHNAPPA S/O. NAGAPPA HALAVAGALA, AGE: 37 YEARS, 4. SHIVAPPA S/O. ANDANAPPA HALAVAGALA, AGE: 35 YEARS, 5. HALAPPA S/O. ANDANAPPA HALAVAGALA, AGE: 32 YEARS, ALL ARE R/O. AREMALLAPUR, TQ. RANEBENNUR, DIST. HAVERI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M.H. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6125 CRL.RP No. 100049 of 2017 REP. BY RANEBENNUR RURAL POLICE, DIST. HAVERI, REPRESENTED BY THE S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397(1) READ WITH SECTION 401 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY HON'BLE II ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS JUDGE, HAVERI, SITTING AT RANEBENNUR, IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.15/2013, DATED 18.11.2016 BE SET ASIDE AND TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RANEBENNUR IN C.C.NO.152/2006 DATED 19.01.2013, BE SET ASIDE BY ALLOWING THIS REVISION PETITION BY ACQUITTING THE PETITIONERS FOR THE ALL THE CHARGES LEVELED AND CONVICTED THEM FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 341, 504, 323, 326 AND 506 R/W. 149 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6125 CRL.RP No. 100049 of 2017 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri.M.H.Patil, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.Praveena Y. Devareddyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State/respondent. 2. Revision petitioners are the accused who have suffered an order of conviction in CC No.152/2006 dated 19.01.2013 for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 341, 323 and 326 read with Section 149 of IPC which was confirmed in Crl.A.No.15/2013 dated 18.11.2016. 3. Sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate is extracted hereunder: “The accused No.1 to 6 are hereby convicted for the offence punishable U/s.143 R/W sec.149 IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of RS.300/- each. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo SI for 3 months. The accused No.1 to 6 are hereby convicted for the offence punishable U/s.147 R/W sec.149 IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of RS.300/- each. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo SI for 3 months. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6125 CRL.RP No. 100049 of 2017 The accused No.1 to 6 are hereby convicted for the offence punishable U/s.341 R/w sec.149 IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.300/- each. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo SI for 3 months. The accused No. to 6 are hereby convicted for the offence punishable U/s.323 R/w sec.149 IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of RS.500/- each. In default of payment of fine, they shall undergo SI for 3 months. The accused No.1 to 6 are hereby convicted for the offence punishable U/s.326 R/w sec.149 IPC and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years and fine of RS.1,000/- each.” 4. While maintaining the conviction, sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate modified by the learned Judge in the First Appellate Court which is extracted hereunder: “The instant criminal appeal filed by the appellants who are accused No.1 to 6, U/sec.374(3) of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed in part. The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court ie, Learned Prl. Sr.Civil Judge & JMFC, Ranebennur in C.C.No.152/2006, dated: 19.01.2013, so for as it relates to convicting the accused No.3 to 6, for the offence punishable U/sec.326 R/w sec.149 of IPC is hereby set aside. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6125 CRL.RP No. 100049 of 2017 Consequently, the accused No.3 to 6 are acquitted alleged offence punishable U/sec.326 R/w sec.149 of IPC. The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court against the accused No.1 to 6, so for as it relates to the offence punishable U/sec.143, 147, 341, 323 R/w sec.149 of IPC is hereby confirmed. Similarly, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court i.e., Learned Prl.Sr.Civil Judge & JMFC, Ranebennur against the accused No.1 and 2 in C.C.No.152/2006,dated:19.01.2013, for the offence punishable U/sec.326 R/w sec.149 of IPC, is hereby confirmed. Their bail bond and surety if any, stands cancelled after appeal period is over. The property seized in P.F.No.53/2006 (P.R.No.15/2008) i.e., one stone which is marked in the trial court as M.O.1 is ordered to be destroyed as worthless after the appeal period is over. (Trial court has not passed any order with regard to disposal of the property involved in the case i.e., M.O.1 stone). The fine amount if any, deposited by the accused No.3 to 6 in the trial court, to the extent of setting aside their conviction and sentence for the offence punishable U/sec.326 R/w sec.149 of IPC shall be refunded to them after appeal period is over. Office is also directed to send the trial court record forthwith along with the copy of this judgment without any delay.” - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6125 CRL.RP No. 100049 of 2017 5. Being aggrieved by the same, accused persons are before this Court, in this revision. 6. At the outset, learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that parties are close relatives and they have settled the dispute by the intervention of the elders and well wishers and to maintain peace and harmony among the members of the family. Therefore, sought for setting aside the order of conviction and sentence. 7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes said submission on the ground that accused persons are also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC. Therefore, this Court on the basis of compromise that has taken place outside the Court, cannot be countenanced in law and sought for dismissal of the revision petition. 8. Having heard the parties in detail, this Court is satisfied that there is a true settlement among the parties inasmuch as complainant who is present before the Court, - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6125 CRL.RP No. 100049 of 2017 unequivocally submits that elders and well wishers have mediated among the parties. 9. Taking note of the close relationship namely accused No.1 and defacto complainant being own brothers, following the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal v. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 834, sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate modified by the First Appellate Court needs to be further modified by directing the accused persons to undergo simple imprisonment for a day while maintaining the conviction order. 10. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. Revision petition is allowed in part. ii. While maintaining the conviction of the accused persons for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 341, 323 and 326 read with Section 149 of IPC, sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate modified by the First - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6125 CRL.RP No. 100049 of 2017 Appellate Court is further modified by directing each of the revision petitioners to undergo simple imprisonment for a day till rising of the Court. iii. Out of the fine amount recovered, sum of Rs.5,000/- is ordered to be paid as compensation to P.W.2 – Ningappa Kenchappa Halavagala under due identification. Office is directed to return the Trial Court Records with copy of this order forthwith. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE KAV CT:PA List No.: 2 Sl No.: 41