- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20540 CRL.RP No. 888 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 888 OF 2018 (397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS) BETWEEN: 1. SHAMBHU @ LINGARAJU S/O LATE PAPANNA @ C K PAPEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT CHANDAGALU VILLAGE, MANDYA TALUK-571 405 2. SMT VIJAYAMMA W/O PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT ABALAVADI VILLAGE, KOPPA HOBLI MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DIST-571 425 3. SMT CHANNAMMA S/O LATE PAPANNA @ C K PAPEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT CHANDAGALU VILLAGE, MANDYA TALUK-571 405 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI ANIL KUMAR A.S FOR SRI PARAMESWARAPPA C, ADVOCATES) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KERAGODU POLICE STATION MANDYA DISTRICT-571 446 Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20540 CRL.RP No. 888 of 2018 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.WAHEEDA.M.M, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER) THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED 05.01.2018, PASSED BY THE LEARNED I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MANDYA IN C.C.NO.112/2014, AND THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.06.2018, PASSED BY THE LEARNED IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA IN CRL.A.NO.7/2018 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 498A OF IPC AND SECTION 3 AND 4 OF THE D.P ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Anil Kumar A.S., appearing on behalf of Sri Parameshwarappa C., learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Smt. Waheeda M.M., learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State. 2. Revision petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.112/2014 having suffered an order conviction as under for the offences punishable under Section 498A r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20540 CRL.RP No. 888 of 2018 Act and the Order of Conviction and Sentence was upheld by the First Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.7/2018: “DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ ¨sÁ.zÀA.¸ÀA PÀ®A 498 (J) gÀrAiÀÄ°è£À DgÉÆÃ¥À ¸Á©ÃvÁVgÀĪÀ PÁgÀt¢AzÀ 2 ªÀµÀðUÀ¼À ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸ÉgÀªÁ¸À ªÀÄvÀÄÛ vÀ¯Á gÀÆ. 1,000/- UÀ¼À zÀAqÀ ¥ÁªÀw¸ÀĪÀAvÉ DzÉò¹zÉ. zÀAqÀ ¥ÁªÀw¸À®Ä vÀ¦àzÀ°è 6 wAUÀ¼À ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸ÉgɪÁ¸À C£ÀĨsÀ«¸ÀĪÀAvÉ DzÉò¹zÉ. DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀ.¤.PÁ. PÀ®A 3 gÀrAiÀÄ°è£À DgÉÆÃ¥À ¸Á©ÃvÁVgÀĪÀ PÁgÀt¢AzÀ 5 ªÀµÀð 6 wAUÀ¼À ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸ÉgÀªÁ¸À ªÀÄvÀÄÛ vÀ¯Á gÀÆ. 20,000/- UÀ¼À zÀAqÀ ¥ÁªÀw¸ÀĪÀAvÉ DzÉò¹zÉ. zÀAqÀ ¥ÁªÀw¸À®Ä vÀ¦àzÀ°è MAzÀÆPÁ®Ä ªÀµÀð ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸ÉgɪÁ¸À C£ÀĨsÀ«¸ÀĪÀAvÉ DzÉò¹zÉ. DgÉÆæUÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀ.¤.PÁ. PÀ®A 4 gÀrAiÀÄ°è£À DgÉÆÃ¥À ¸Á©ÃvÁVgÀĪÀ PÁgÀt¢AzÀ 1 ªÀµÀð ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸ÉgÀªÁ¸À ªÀÄvÀÄÛ vÀ¯Á gÀÆ.5000/- UÀ¼À zÀAqÀ ¥ÁªÀw¸ÀĪÀAvÉ DzÉò¹zÉ. zÀAqÀ ¥ÁªÀw¸À®Ä vÀ¦àzÀ°è 3 wAUÀ¼À ¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå ¸ÉgɪÁ¸À C£ÀĨsÀ«¸ÀĪÀAvÉ DzÉò¹zÉ. ²PÉëAiÀÄ£ÀÄß KPÀPÁ®PÉÌ eÁjUÉƽ¸ÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ.” 3. At the outset, Sri Anil Kumar A.S., learned counsel for the revision petitioners would submit that the victim is no more and so also accused Nos.1 and 2. 4. He would further submit that the petitioners are the mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the victim and they did not have any role in the alleged demand of dowry and harassment and sought for allowing the revision. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20540 CRL.RP No. 888 of 2018 5. Alternatively, Sri Anil Kumar would submit that in the event this Court upholding the order of conviction, taking note of the fact that both the petitioners have rendered widow and they do not have anybody to look after them, the sentence of imprisonment may be set aside by enhancing the fine amount reasonably. 6. He would also submit that there are no dependents to the victim lady. Therefore, whatever the amount that would be imposed by this Court towards the defraying expenses of the State, petitioners are ready to pay the same. 7. Per contra, Smt. Waheeda M.M., learned High Court Government Pleader, opposes the revision grounds as well as the alternate submission. 8. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 9. On such perusal of the material on record it is crystal clear that in the case on hand there is material evidence on record which would be sufficient enough to sustain the order of conviction recorded by the learned Trial Magistrate, confirmed by the First Appellate Court, inasmuch as in the presence of PW3, the demand of dowry has taken place and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20540 CRL.RP No. 888 of 2018 PW11 being the sister of complainant has stated about the demand. 10. Defence of the accused is that there was a maintenance proceedings pending before the Civil Judge Court, Mandya and there was a settlement in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. But, the said settlement failed and therefore, false case has been filed. 11. Such a defence was not probabilised by placing necessary oral and documentary evidence on record. 12. Thus, the order of conviction recorded by the learned Trial Magistrate, confirmed by the First Appellate Court needs no interference by this Court that too in the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction. 13. Accordingly, having regard to limited power of revisional jurisdiction, order of conviction needs to be upheld. 14. However, with regard to the sentence is concerned, since the revision petitioners have rendered widow and practically not having any source of income nor anybody to maintain and they are earning their livelihood by household works and they have not actively participated in the demand of dowry, this Court is of the considered opinion that if the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20540 CRL.RP No. 888 of 2018 sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate, confirmed by the First Appellate Court is modified by directing the petitioners to undergo simple imprisonment for the day till the rising of the Court by directing them to pay enhanced fine amount of Rs.25,000/- each ends of justice would be met. 15. Accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) Revision petition is allowed in part. (ii) While maintaining the conviction of the accused for the offences punishable under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate, confirmed by the First Appellate Court is hereby modified by directing the petitioners to undergo simple imprisonment for the day till the raising of the Court and to pay enhanced fine amount of Rs.25,000/- each on or before 10.05.2026 before the learned Trial Magistrate. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20540 CRL.RP No. 888 of 2018 (iii) Failure to pay the enhanced fine amount would automatically result in restoration of the sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate, confirmed by the First Appellate Court. (iv) Office is directed to return the Trial Court records with copy of this order forthwith for issue of modified conviction warrant. SD/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 60