- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5921 CRL.RP No. 100214 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100214 OF 2017 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MEENAKSHI W/O. KUMARAPPA GITTANAHALLI @ GIRAKENAHALLI, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: BIDARI, TQ: SHIVAMOGGA. 2. SHOBHA W/O. SHIVAPPA BANGAR, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: MALAVALLI, TQ: SHIKARIPUR. 3. GIRISH S/O. RAMANAGOUDA MARIGOUDRA, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: AGRICUTLURE, R/O: BETAKERUR, TQ: HIREKERUR. 4. NEELAWWA @ SHIVAKKA W/O. RAMANAGOUDA MARIGOUDRA, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: BETAKERUR, TQ: HIREKERUR. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI V.G. BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PSI OF HAMSABHAVI POLICE STATION, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST. HAVERI. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HIREKERUR IN C.C.NO 25 OF 2009 DATED 18.12.2013 AND BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE COURT OF II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT HAVERI (SITTING AT RANEBENNUR) IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2014 DATED 11.07.2017 THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 341, 324, 326, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC AND THE PETITIONERS KINDLY BE ACQUITTED. MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Date: 2025.04.08 11:08:15 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5921 CRL.RP No. 100214 of 2017 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri.V.G.Bhat, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.Praveena Y. Devareddyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State/respondent. 2. Presence of the complainant was secured to find out the feasibility of amicable settlement as the genesis of the crime was in respect of the pathway in the agricultural land. 3. Revision petitioners and the complainant are the close relatives as well. After some amount of persuasion, parties arrived at an amicable settlement. To have certainty as to the terms of the settlement, a joint memo came to be filed along with the sketch. 4. As per the sketch, pathway is leftover by the petitioners in their land for the complainant to make use of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5921 CRL.RP No. 100214 of 2017 the same to reach his land and also for transporting the goods for agricultural operation line, manure etc. 5. Taking note of the intrinsic dispute involved in the matter, while maintaining the conviction, if the sentence of imprisonment is set aside in view of the settlement, ends of justice would be met. 6. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. Revision petition is allowed in part. ii. While maintaining the conviction of the revision petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 341, 324, 326, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, sentence is modified by directing the revision petitioners to undergo simple imprisonment for a day in view of the amicable settlement between the parties as per the joint memo. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5921 CRL.RP No. 100214 of 2017 iii. 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.: 60