- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100018 OF 2021 (397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)) C/W CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100019 OF 2021 IN CRL. R.P. NO.100018 OF 2021 BETWEEN: SMT. SHANTA W/O. VASANT SAVANT, AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KARWAR ROAD, OPP. BASEL MISSION SCHOOL, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD. PIN-580023. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH M.KHARVI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH SUB URBAN P.S., HUBLI, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD-580008. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.PC., PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT DATED 30.09.2020 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD SITTING AT HUBBALLI IN CR. APPEAL NO.155/2013 DATED 30.09.2020 AND ALSO THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED PRL. CIVIL Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIHG COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI IN C.C.NO.1918/2007 DATED 24.10.2013 UNDER SECTION 468, 471 AND 420 R/W 149 OF IPC SO FAR AS ACCUSED NO.6/APPELLANT IN CONCERNED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN CRL. R.P. NO.100019 OF 2021 BETWEEN: SMT. NEELAVVA W/O. MAHADEVAPPA HADAPAD, AGE. 81 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. UNAKAL, NEAR MAILARALINGAN GUDI, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH M.KHARVI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY P.I. SUB URBAN P.S. HUBLI, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT DATED 30.09.2020 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD SITTING AT HUBBALLI IN CR. APPEAL NO.154/2013 DATED 30.09.2020 AND ALSO THE LEARNED PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI IN C.C.NO.1919/2007 DATED 24.10.2013 UNDER SECTIONS 120B, 468, 471 AND 420 OF IPC SO FAR AS ACCUSED NO.5 APPELLANT IN CONCERNED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE CRIMINAL REVISION PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND) Heard Sri Venkatesh M. Kharvi, learned counsel for the accused-revision petitioners, and Sri T. Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent-State. 2. The Criminal Revision Petition No.100018/2021 is filed by accused No.6 challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.10.2013 passed in C.C. No.1918/2017 by the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi (for short, ‘the trial Court’), and the order dated 30.09.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.155/2013 by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, sitting at Hubballi (for short, ‘the appellate Court’). 3. The Criminal Revision Petition No.100019/2021 is filed by the accused No.5 challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.10.2013 passed - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 in C.C. No.1919/2017 by the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi (for short, ‘the trial Court’), and the order dated 30.09.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.154/2013 by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, sitting at Hubballi (for short, ‘the appellate Court’). 4. The aforesaid revision petitions arise out of the same crime registered in Crime No.203/2006 by the Sub- Urban Police Station, Hubballi, and are, therefore, taken up together for consideration. 5. It is the case of the prosecution that accused No.1 made use of one Smt. Kasturibai Ekbote and forged documents by falsely claiming that she was the wife of one Sangayya Hiremath, a freedom fighter, and thereby secured sanction of a freedom fighter’s family pension in her favour through the said forged documents. It is further alleged that accused No.1 threatened Smt. Kasturibai with dire consequences, including death, if she disclosed the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 forgery. Subsequently, Smt. Kasturibai lodged a complaint before the Sub-Urban Police Station, Hubballi, pursuant to which a case was registered in Crime No.203/2006 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) against accused No.1. During the course of investigation, based on the voluntary statement of accused No.1, it came to light that she along with others accused had similarly forged documents and obtained sanction of freedom fighter’s family pension in the names of two other women, namely, Smt. Nillavva Hadapad (accused No.5), shown as the wife of Fakirappa Basrikatti, and Smt. Shantha Savanth (accused No.6), projected as the wife of Bhaskarappa Arkasalli. Upon completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer filed three charge sheets against the accused persons. 6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution in C.C.No.1918/2007 examined 6 witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 6 and marked 25 documents as Exhibits P1 to P25. In - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 C.C.No.1919/2007, the prosecution examined 6 witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 6 and marked 23 documents as Exhibits P1 to P23. Upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Trial Court convicted the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 468, 471, and 420 of IPC. Both the accused were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence under Section 120B of IPC; simple imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 468 of IPC; simple imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 471 of IPC; and simple imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 420 of IPC. 7. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Trial Court, accused Nos.5 and 6 preferred Criminal Appeal Nos.154/2013 and 155/2013, respectively. The appellate Court on re- appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 record, set aside the conviction for the offence punishable under Section 120B of the IPC, while confirming the conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 471, and 420 read with Section 149 of the IPC. 8. Sri Venkatesh M. Kharvi, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the prosecution has produced only Xerox copies of various documents as exhibits to prove its case. However, the said documents have not been duly proved, as the officials who issued them were not examined. It is further submitted that the petitioners acted at the instigation of the other accused persons, without knowledge of the nature of the act being committed. The offences charged relate to forgery and allied offences. However, the prosecution has not produced any expert opinion to substantiate such allegations. The documents alleged to be forged are purportedly issued by Government authorities, but no evidence has been adduced to establish forgery, as the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 concerned issuing authorities are not examined. Learned counsel further contends that the evidence adduced by the prosecution is insufficient to establish the essential ingredients of the offences charged. 9. Per contra, Sri T. Hanumareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent-State, submits that PW.5-in both cases are the sons of the freedom fighters. The evidence of PW.5 clearly establishes that the petitioners impersonated the deceased wives of the freedom fighters in order to claim the freedom fighter’s pension. It is submitted that the trial Court and the appellate Court have recorded concurrent findings, which are based on duly proved evidence. Hence, no ground is made out to warrant interference. 10. Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the materials on record. 11. The case against the accused-petitioners is that they, along with other accused persons, entered into a - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 criminal conspiracy to secure sanction of the freedom fighters' family pension in the names of fictitious persons. In furtherance of the said conspiracy, the petitioners impersonated the wives of deceased freedom fighters. 12. To prove its case in C.C. No.1919/2017, the prosecution examined PW.5-the son of the freedom. PW.5 deposed that Fakirappa Basarikatti died on 19.07.1981 and that his mother, Smt. Mallavva, passed away on 12.08.2000. In support of this assertion, the prosecution relied upon Exs.P9 and P12-death certificates. The trial Court, upon considering the said evidence along with other material on record, held that accused Nos.1 and 5 had committed the offences charged and accordingly convicted and sentenced them. The appellate Court, on an appeals filed by the petitioners, confirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence. The only material evidence relied upon is the testimony of PW.5, who categorically stated that his mother died on 12.08.2000, whereas the alleged offence was committed in the year 2006. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 13. In C.C. No.1918/2007, in relation to accused No.6, the prosecution examined Bhaskarappa Arkasali-the son of the freedom fighter as PW.5. PW.5 deposed that his father died leaving behind no surviving wife and further stated that accused No.6 is not the wife of his father. The trial Court placed reliance on Ex.P8, which records that Bhaskarappa Arkasali died on 26.11.2000, and on Ex.P9, which establishes that the wife of the said Bhaskarappa Arkasali had predeceased him on 06.06.1981. Upon consideration of the aforesaid documents and other evidence on record, the trial Court concluded that accused Nos.1 and 6 had committed the offences charged. 14. The important aspect that emerges from the orders of both the trial Courts and the prosecution evidence is that the documents produced to claim the freedom fighters’ pension appear to be mere Xerox copies. The allegation that the said documents were forged cannot be accepted in the absence of examination of the officials who issued them. In the absence of such evidence, the - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 allegation of forgery remains unsubstantiated. Furthermore, the Court cannot assume the role of an expert to conclude that the documents are forged, particularly in the absence of any material evidence to the contrary. 15. The evidence on record further indicates that the petitioners are illiterate and were unaware of the nature of the acts that transpired when they were asked to appear before the authorities as Neelavva, wife of Fakkirappa Basavanneppa Basarikatti, and Shanta Savanta, wife of Bhaskarappa Arkasali. The evidence also reveals that the petitioners were offered a paltry sum by the other accused persons, who are alleged to have conspired to obtain the freedom fighters’ pension in fictitious names. The limited role attributed to the petitioners is that of merely presenting themselves as the wives of the aforesaid deceased freedom fighters. The evidence brought on record by the prosecution is not - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 sufficient to conclusively establish that the petitioners committed the offences charged. 16. The trial Court and the appellate Court, without examining the specific role of the petitioner, have recorded a finding of guilt solely based on the acts attributed to accused persons. 17. A perusal of the evidence on record demonstrates that the findings recorded by the trial Court and the appellate Court are contrary to the material on record and are not legally sustainable. 18. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. The criminal revision petitions are allowed. ii. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in C.C.No.1918/2017 dated 24.10.2013 on the file of learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi and order in Criminal Appeal - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8397 CRL.RP No. 100018 of 2021 C/W CRL.RP No. 100019 of 2021 No.155/2013 dated 30.09.2020 on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, sitting at Hubballi is set aside. iii. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in C.C.No.1919/2017 dated 24.10.2013 on the file of learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi and order in Criminal Appeal No.154/2013 dated 30.09.2020 on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dharwad, sitting at Hubballi is set aside. iv. The accused-petitioners are acquitted of all charged offences. v. The bail bonds and sureties if any, stands cancelled. Sd/- (K V ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0