RAMULU H R S/O H RUDRAPPA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
CRL.RP/100461/2022 · 2025-04-02
V Srishananda
Criminal Appealbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7746 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7746 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5877 CRL.RP No. 100461 of 2022
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.100461 OF 2022 (397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
RAMULU H.R. S/O. H. RUDRAPPA, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURIST, R/O. NEAR VALMIKI SAMUDAYA BHAVANA, JALIHAL VILLAGE, TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI B.C. JNANAYYA SWAMI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA (MOKA POLICE STATION, BALLARI) R/BY. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W. 401 OF CR.PC., SEEKING TO KINDLY ALLOW THE REVISION PETITION AND KINDLY CALL FOR RECORDS AND KINDLY SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION PASSED IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 12/2021, DATED 29.08.2022, BY II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BALLARI CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION IN CC NO. 52/2017, DATED 15.02.2021 BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM BALLARI AND CONSEQUENTLY ACQUIT THE ACCUSED FOR AN OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 279 AND 304(A) AND SECTION 187 OF MV ACT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Date: 2025.04.09 11:38:27 +0530
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5877 CRL.RP No. 100461 of 2022
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)
Heard Sri.B.C.Jnanayya Swami, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri.Praveena Y. Devareddyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State/respondent.
2. Revision petitioner is the accused who has suffered an order of conviction in CC No.52/2017 dated 15.02.2021 for the offences punishable under Section 279 and 304A of IPC read with Section 187 of IMV Act which was confirmed in Crl.A.No.12/2021 dated 29.08.2022 is the revision petitioner and has been sentenced by the learned Trial Magistrate as under:
“Acting under Section 255(2) of Cr.P.C., the accused is hereby found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304(A) of IPC and read with Section 187 of IMV Act and convicted by ordering to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC and to undergo S.I. for the period of six months with a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 304(A) of IPC respectively. In default of payment of fine, the accused is ordered to undergo S.I. for a period of ten days for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC and Ninety days for
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5877 CRL.RP No. 100461 of 2022
default of fine amount of Rs.5,000/- under Section 304(A) of IPC. The accused is hereby convicted for the offence punishable under Section 187 of IMV Act and ordered to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and shall undergo simple imprisonment for one months and in default to pay fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month. The sentence and the default sentence shall runs concurrently. The bail bond of the accused and surety bond of the accused stands cancelled.”
3.
Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the revision petition are as under:
3.1. A complaint came to be lodged by D.Devendrappa with Bellary Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 279, 304A of IPC read with Section 187 of IMV Act contending that on 11.04.2016 at about 7.30 p.m. within the jurisdiction of Ballary Rural Police Station, on M.Gonal – Jalihal Cross near the agricultural land of Harishchandra, Mahesh being the rider of the motorcycle carrying his father – Dugappa a pillion rider, was proceeding on a motorcycle bearing No.KA- 35/U-6972 met with an road traffic accident on account of rash and negligent riding of the another motorcycle bearing No.KA- 34/EE-0841, which dashed against the motorcycle of Mahesh.
- 4 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5877 CRL.RP No. 100461 of 2022
As a result both the rider and pillion rider namely Mahesh and Dugappa fell down and suffered serious injuries. Injured persons were shifted to VIMS Hospital, Bellary.
3.2. Based on the said complaint, police registered a case in Crime No.58/2016 initially for the offences punishable under Section 279, 304A of IPC read with Section 187 of IMV Act.
4. During the course of treatment, both the injured persons died. As such, police invoked the offence against the accused under Section 304A of IPC and conducted detailed investigation and filed charge sheet.
5. After thorough trial, accused was found guilty being the rider of the motorcycle bearing No. No.KA-34/EE-0841 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.12/2021.
7. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court after securing the records, heard the arguments of the parties in detail and on reappreciation of the material evidence placed on record, dismissed the appeal filed by the accused and
- 5 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5877 CRL.RP No. 100461 of 2022
confirmed the order of sentence passed by the learned Trial Magistrate.
8. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before this Court, in this revision.
9.
Learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the revision petition vehemently contended police have suppressed the genesis of real accident. In fact, both the injured persons met with an accident with a tractor which was carrying 20 women and 30 men. Same has been suppressed by the police only with an intention to make gain for the dependants of the deceased in a road traffic accident. Therefore, learned Trial Magistrate and learned Judge in the First Appellate Court erred in law in convicting the accused for the aforesaid offences resulting in miscarriage of justice and sought for allowing the revision petition. 10. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader supports the impugned judgments by contending that except suggesting to the eye witness and the complainant about the alleged involvement of the tractor, no other material evidence has been placed on record. Therefore, conviction of the
- 6 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5877 CRL.RP No. 100461 of 2022
accused is just and proper and sought for dismissal of the revision petition. 11. Having heard the arguments of both the sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 12. On such perusal of the material on record, accident that occurred on 11.04.2016 at about 7.30 p.m. near the land of Harishchandra on M.Gonal – Jalihal Cross stands established by placing necessary evidence on record. 13. IMV reports of both the motorcycles would show the damages to both the motorcycles which would amply establish the accident. So also the eye witnesses having denied the suggestions made on behalf of the revision petitioner that tractor was also involved in the accident, accused failed to establish the alternate theory by placing cogent evidence on record. 14. Moreover, at the time of recording the accused statement, accused failed to explain the incriminatory circumstances nor placed any defence evidence on record. 15. Taking note of these aspects of the matter and considering the death of Mahesh and his father – Dugappa on account of the injuries sustained by them in the road traffic
- 7 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:5877 CRL.RP No. 100461 of 2022
accident as is depicted in the post-mortem report, learned Trial Magistrate was justified in convicting the accused for the aforesaid offences which has been rightly reappreciated by learned Judge in the First Appellate Court. 16.
Accordingly having regard to the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction, this Court is of the considered opinion that revision petitioner has not made any grounds whatsoever muchless good grounds to admit the matter for further
consideration.
17. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER i. Admission is declined consequently, revision petition is also dismissed. ii. Time is granted for the revision petitioner to surrender before the Trial Court till 30.04.2025. 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.: 15