- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23888 CRL.RP No. 1043 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.1043 OF 2019 BETWEEN: SANTHOSHA S/O GOVINDARAJU, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/O 1ST CROSS, ASHWATHNAGARA, N.M.C HOSAMANE, BHADRAVATHI - 577 301 …PETITIONER (BY SRI PRASAD B S, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA BY RURAL POLICE STATION, BHADRAVATHI, REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE -560001 …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.WAHEEDA.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 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE (ACJ) (Sr.Dn.) AND JMFC, BHADRAVATHI IN C.C.NO.438/2016 DATED 10.08.2018 AND ORDER DATED 17.07.2019 PASSED BY THE IV ADDITIONAL DISRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE SHIMOGA, SITTING AT BHADRAVATHI IN CRL.A.NO.5022/2018, ACQUIT THE PETITIONER. Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23888 CRL.RP No. 1043 of 2019 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 B.S.Prasad, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Smt.Waheeda M.M., learned High Court Government Pleader. 2. Revision Petitioner is the accused who suffered an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Sections 454 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code in CC No.438/2016, confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.5022/2018. 3. At the outset, Sri B.S.Prasad, learned counsel for the revision petitioner would submit that this is the second case where the petitioner has been convicted and in the present case he was in custody for a day. In another case, though petitioner has been acquitted, he was in custody for eight months. 4. He further submits that, taking note of the above aspect, custody period already undergone by the accused may be treated as the period of imprisonment by setting aside the remaining portion of the sentence ordered by the learned Trial - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23888 CRL.RP No. 1043 of 2019 Magistrate confirmed by the learned Judge in the First Appellate Court, by enhancing the fine amount reasonably. 5. Per contra, Smt.Waheeda, learned High Court Government Pleader would oppose the said submission by contending that accused is a known thief. Therefore, no mercy can be shown to the petitioner. 6. She would further contend that mere acquittal in the subsequent case would not ipso facto make out a case that accused is innocent in the case on hand, having regard to the concurrent finding of the fact recorded by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the learned Judge in the First Appellate Court and thus sought for dismissal of the revision petition. 7. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 8. On such perusal of the material on record, it is noted that stolen articles were recovered from the custody of the accused based on the voluntary statement, after he has been apprehended by the police. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23888 CRL.RP No. 1043 of 2019 9. Those articles which are gold and silver ornaments were also returned to their owner which were marked as MOs-1 to 4 before the Trial Court. 10. Admittedly for possessing those precious ornaments no explanation is forthcoming from the accused. 11. In a matter of this nature, recovery of the stolen article at the instance of the accused based on the voluntary statement would be a pivotal point in recording an order of conviction which has been rightly upheld by the learned Judge in the First Appellate Court. 12. Taking note of these aspects of the matter, conviction needs to be maintained. 13. Having said so, taking note of the fact that the accused is now earning his livelihood by doing mason work and has got a young daughter to take care of, he has lost another child, and also taking note of the fact that in another case he was in custody for a period of eight months wherein he got acquitted, and further that he was in custody in this case for a day, if the fine amount is enhanced in a sum of Rs.25,000/-, out of which - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23888 CRL.RP No. 1043 of 2019 a sum of Rs.20,000/- can be paid as compensation to PW-1 and balance amount towards the defraying expenses of the State, ends of justice would be met. 14. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. Revision Petition is allowed. ii. While maintaining conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 454 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code, sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the learned Judge in the First Appellate Court is modified, by treating the custody period of one day undergone by the petitioner/accused as the period of imprisonment and enhancing the fine amount in a sum of Rs.25,000/-. iii. Out of the enhanced fine amount Rs.25,000/-, Rs.20,000/-is ordered to be paid as compensation to P.W.1 under due identification and the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23888 CRL.RP No. 1043 of 2019 remaining sum of Rs.5,000/- is ordered to be paid towards defraying expenses of the State. iv. Time is granted to the petitioner/accused till 31st May 2026 to pay the enhanced fine amount. v. Office to return the Trial Court Records with copy of this Order for issue of modified conviction warrant. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 2 Sl No.: 68