- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7031 CRL.RP No. 100229 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 100229 OF 2019 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS) BETWEEN: 1. FAKKIRESH S/O SWATREPPA DODDAMANI, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT RESIDENT OF RAMAGERI, TQ. SHIRAHATTI. 2. YAMANAPPA M/O GALEVVA DODDAMANI, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: COOLIE, RESIDENT OF RAMAGERI, TQ. SHIRAHATTI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH B. MALAGI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.D.L.LADKHAN, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE PSI, LAXMESHWAR PS, BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVAR, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C, 1973, SEEKING TO CALL FOR ENTIRE RECORDS FROM LEANED PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, GADAG IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 57/2015 DISPOSED OF ON 22.07.2019 AND C.C.NO. 203/2013 DISPOSED OF ON 24.04.2015 BY LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, COURT, LAXMESHWAR AND TO EXERCISE POWERS OF REVISION, TO EXMINE THE CORRECTNESS LEGALITY OF Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7031 CRL.RP No. 100229 of 2019 THE PROCEDINGS AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CONVICTION PASSED IN C.C.NO.203/2013 DISPOSED ON 24.04.2015 OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 323, 326, 504, & 506 R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, LAXMESHWAR AND SET ASIDE ORDER/JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE PRL. DIST. & SESSIONS COURT, GADAG IN CRL.A.NO.57/2015 DISPOSED OF ON 22.07.2019 AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS.1 & 2 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND TO ACQUIT THE ACCUSED PERSONS OF CHARGED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri D.L. Ladkhan, learned counsel for revision petitioner and Sri Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent. 2. At the outset, Sri D.L. Ladkhan would submit that in view of Ex.P-5 and testimony of the injured witness Maruti Doddamani, the challenge as to the conviction, that too in the revision petition, is on fragile grounds and therefore, suitable orders be passed. 3. However, Sri D.L. Ladkhan would contend that taking note of the relationship between the injured person - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7031 CRL.RP No. 100229 of 2019 and the accused persons and also on account of the civil litigation that was pending among the parties, incident has occurred at the spur of the moment. 4. Therefore, by enhancing the fine amount imposed on the accused persons, sentence of imprisonment may be set aside taking note of the fact that the incident has occurred in the year 2013. 5. He would also contend that post incident, there is no complaint against the accused persons by the complainant party. Therefore, suitable orders be passed. 6. Per contra, Sri Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the submissions made on behalf of the revision petitioners especially in view of the fact that the injury sustained by the injured vide Ex.P-5 is grievous in nature. 7. Taking note of rival contentions of the parties, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7031 CRL.RP No. 100229 of 2019 8. On such perusal of the material on record, revision petitioners are the accused who have suffered an order of conviction and ordered to undergo imprisonment for the offence punishable Sections 323, 326, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and fine. 9. On an appeal by the accused, learned Judge in the First Appellate Court set aside the conviction under Sections 504 and 323 read with Section 34 of IPC but confirmed the order of conviction for the offence punishable under Sections 326 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. 10. Simple imprisonment of two years is ordered by the First Appellate Court for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC on the basis of the appeal preferred by the State as there was no sentence of imprisonment ordered by the Trial Magistrate for the proved offences. 11. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused persons are before this Court. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7031 CRL.RP No. 100229 of 2019 12. Taking note of the fact that the accused persons are relatives of the PW-1-Maruti Doddamani and also taking note of the fact that the prosecution has failed to produce the original X-ray film or the original radiological report, based on Ex.P-5 alone, the order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC could not have been sustained. 13. Accordingly, following the dictum of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of State v. Sheenappa Gowda1, the order of the Trial Magistrate needs to be modified for the remaining proved offences punishable Sections 506 and 324 of IPC as offence punishable under Section 326 of IPC cannot be countenanced in law. 14. Hence, the following is passed: ORDER (i) Criminal Revision Petition is allowed in part. 1 (2011) 4 KCCR 2759 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7031 CRL.RP No. 100229 of 2019 (ii) The order of the Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court for the offence under Section 326 of IPC is set aside and accused are acquitted for the said offence. (iii) Instead they are convicted for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC and conviction for the offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC is maintained. (iv) Consequently, the sentence ordered by the First Appellate Court in the appeal filed by the State is modified by directing the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for the day till the rising of the Court and to pay enhanced fine amount of Rs.25,000/- each on or before 10.06.2025. (v) Failure to pay the enhanced fine amount would result in accused persons undergoing simple imprisonment for a further period of six months each. (vi) Out of the fine amount recovered, a sum of Rs.50,000/- is ordered to be paid as compensation to PW-1 Maruti Doddamani under due identification. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:7031 CRL.RP No. 100229 of 2019 Office is directed to return the Trial Court records with a copy of this order forthwith for issuing the modified conviction warrant. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE NAA CT:GSM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 53