- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 400 OF 2014 (C) BETWEEN: 1. ABDUL LATIF @ BADDA LATIF AGED 35 YEARS, S/O LATE IBRAHIM, RESIDING AT KALLAPUMANE, NEAR KALLAPU MASJID, MANGALORE, DK DISTRICT-575 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NEERAJA KARANTH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ULLALA POLICE STATION, MANGALORE RURAL CIRCLE, MANGALORE , DK - 575 001, REP BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE - 1. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.B.LAKSHMAN, HCGP) THIS CRL.A. IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C BY THE ADV., FOR THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.1 PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:18/22.3.14 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K., MANGALORE IN S.C.NO.86/2004 - CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 153-A, 341 AND 307 OF IPC. AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR SIX MONTHS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 153-A OF IPC. AND THE Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 APPELLANT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO S.I. FOR ONE MONTH FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 341 OF IPC. AND THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED IS SENTENCED TO UNDERGO R.I. FOR THREE YEARS AND TO PAY FINE OF RS.10,000/- AND IN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF FINE, TO UNDERGO S.I. FOR SIX MONTHS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 307 OF IPC AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL ARGUMENTS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA ORAL JUDGMENT The appellant who is accused No.1 has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dakshinakannada, Mangalore in SC.No.86/2004, and SC.No.54/2007 dated 18.03.2014. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their status before the trial Court. 3. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that, the Circle Inspector of Police, Mangalore Rural Circle, Mangalore, submitted charge-sheet against the accused for the offence under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 109, 120B, 153A, 307 of IPC read with Section 149 of IPC. The accused belongs to Muslim religion and CW.1 Chandrasekhara Uchila, who belongs - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 to Hindu religion is a leader and active worker of Hindu organization and BJP party. CW.1 is a resident of 'Nithya Niketana', Uchilla, Someshwara Village, Mangalore Taluk. The accused in pursuance of their common object, hatched a criminal conspiracy and planned to murder CW.1, who belongs to Hindu religion, in order to promote enmity between two groups of religions and to disturb the public peace in the society. On 30.01.2004, CW.1 was proceeding in his Maruthi Omni Van CRX-1898 from his house towards Kutharu Koragajja temple to offer prayer. At about 09.30 a.m., when he was proceeding near Bobbukatte School, Kuttaru area, Permannur Village, at that time, at the instigation of accused Nos.6 and 7 to commit the murder of CW.1, accused Nos.1 to 5, in pursuance of their common object, by forming an unlawful assembly armed with talawars, chased the Maruthi Omni of CW.1 in Maruthi 800 car bearing registration number KA-19/N- 5578 by using fake No.KA-20/N-3150. Accused No.5 was driving the car. The accused overtook the vehicle of complainant-CW.1 and stopped their vehicle in front of the said vehicle and prevented CW.1 from proceeding further and accused Nos.1 and 3 got down from the vehicle armed with - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 talwars. Accused No.1 went towards CW.1 and assaulted him with talwar to cut his head, but CW.1 bent his body and talwar hit his right cheek and sustained bleeding injury and accused No.1 attempted to commit the murder of CW.1. CW.1 in spite of suffering the assault and injury, drove his vehicle towards Kutharu. At that time CW.2- Karunakara, CW.3-Praveen Kuthar, CW.4-Bharathraj, who were present near the spot, witnessed the incident and identified the accused. CW.1 went near the shop of Gopal Kuthar near Rajeshwari temple and CW.6-Sathish saw the condition of CW.1 and immediately took him to Justice K.S.Hedge Hospital, Deralakatte and admitted him for treatment. The hospital authority issued MLC to the SHO of Ullala Police Station. CW.39-K.Narayana, HC-768, who was on SHO duty, in Ullal Police Station, received telephone message and immediately rushed to the hospital at about 10:20 a.m. CW.1 was getting the treatment and after the treatment, he enquired CW.1 and recorded the statement and returned to the police station and registered the case in Crime No.27/2004 and submitted the FIR to the Court. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet against the accused for the commission of alleged offences. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 4. After filing the charge-sheet the case was registered in CC.No.3004/2004. Thereafter, cases were committed to the Court of Sessions and same came to be registered in SC No.86/2004. 5. Upon hearing the charges, the trial Court has framed the charges against the accused for the commission of alleged offences and the same were read over and explained to the accused. Having understood the same, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 6. To prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined, in all, 21 witnesses as PW.1 to PW.21 and 29 documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P.29 and 9 material objects were marked as Mo.1 to Mo.9. 7. On closure of prosecution evidence, statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. were recorded. The accused have totally denied the evidence of prosecution witnesses. However, they did not choose to lead any defence evidence on their behalf. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 8. Having heard the arguments on both sides, the trial Court has acquitted accused No.5 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 109, 120B, 153A, 307 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and convicted accused No.1 Abdul Latif @ Badda Latif/the appellant, for the offence punishable under Section 153-A, 341 and 307 of IPC and passed a sentence to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months for the offence under Section 153-A of Indian Penal Code and further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 341 of Indian Penal Code and further the accused is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code. 9. Being aggrieved by this judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the trial Court, the accused No.1/appellant has preferred this appeal. 10. The learned counsel for the appellant Smt. Neeraja Karanth, would submit that the judgment of Sessions Court is wrong, erroneous and contrary to law and facts of the case. The - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 Sessions Court has erred in appreciating evidence in its proper perspective. 11. Though PW.2 to PW.5 are eye-witnesses, they have not lodged any complaint against the accused and even they have not shifted the injured to the hospital. 12. PW.20, PSI has deposed in his evidence that only after receiving information through telephone, he has visited the hospital. The evidence of PW.2 to PW.5 are quite unnatural and cannot be believed. However, the trial court has convicted the accused No.1. Ex.P6, wound certificate reveals that PW.1 Chandrashekara Uchila is accompanied with Mr. Nagesh, whereas in MLC report-Ex.P26, it is stated that injured has been brought by Mr. Sathish. Hence, there is a discrepancy in this regard. In Ex.P6 and Ex.P26, it is mentioned that the alleged assault took place at about 10:00 a.m., near Pilar, however, PW.1 has stated that the incident took place in Babukatte. The distance between Babukattu and Pilar is 2 kilometers. Hence, there is no consistent evidence as to the place of crime as alleged by the prosecution. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 13. Further, she would submit that the complaint is registered against 4 unknown Muslim youth. On the same day, police have recorded the further statement of the complainant, then only he has disclosed all the names of the accused. In paragraph No.27 of the cross-examination of PW.1, he has clearly stated that on the date of alleged incident, he did not know the name of the accused No.1. The description of the accused No.1 is not shown in the FIR. The test identification parade was not properly conducted by the Investigating Officer. 14. The trial Court has rightly observed in paragraph No.39 of the judgment that the Court is not satisfied with the test identification parade relied by the prosecution. However, the trial Court has convicted accused No.1, which is not sustainable under law. 15. There is no consistency in the evidence of PW.1 to PW.5 and all the witnesses are interested witnesses, however, the Investigating Officer has figured them as independent witnesses. 16. There is no cogent, corroborative and consistent evidence in the prosecution witnesses and the same is not - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 considered by the trial Court. On all these grounds, learned counsel for appellant sought to allow this appeal. 17. As against this, learned High Court Government Pleader, Sri. B.Lakshman would submit that the trial Court has properly appreciated the evidence on record in accordance with law and facts. There are no grounds to interfere with the impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the trial Court and sought for dismissal of the appeal. 18. Having heard the arguments on both sides and on perusal of materials placed before this Court, the following points would arise for my consideration: 1. Whether the trial Court is justified in convicting accused No.1/appellant for the offence under Sections 153-A, 341 and 307 of Indian Penal Code? 2. What order? 19. I have examined the materials placed before this Court. 20. The Circle Inspector of Police, Mangalore Rural Circle, Mangalore submitted the charge-sheet against the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 accused for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 109, 120B, 153-A, 307 of IPC read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. 21. To prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined in all, 21 witnesses as PW.1 to PW.21 and 29 documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P29 and 9 material objects were marked as MO.1 to MO.9. 22. This case arises out of the complaint filed by Sri.Chandrashekara Uchilla, who is examined as PW.1, in which it is stated as under: “¢£ÁAPÀ 30.01.2004 gÀAzÀÄ zÉÃgÀ¼ÀPÀmÉÖ PÉ.J¸ï ºÉUÉØ ZÁjmÉç¯ï D¸ÀàvÉæAiÀÄ vÀÄvÀÄð aQvÁì «¨sÁUÀzÀ°è ºÀ¯Éè ¤«ÄvÀÛ aQvÉì ¥ÀqÉAiÀÄÄwÛgÀĪÀ ²æà ZÀAzÀæ±ÉÃSgÀ GZÀÑ® ¥ÁæAiÀÄ 43 ªÀµÀð vÀAzÉ ZÉ£Àßö¥Àà ¥ÀÇeÁj, ªÁ¸ÀB ²æà ¤vÁå¤PÉÃvÀö GZÀÑ® ¸ÉÆêÉÄñÀégÀ UÁæªÀÄ, ªÀÄAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ vÁ®ÆSÄ ¤ªÁ¹AiÀÄ£ÀÄß «ZÁj¹ §gÀPÉÆAqÀ ºÉýPÉ. £Á£ÀÄ ªÉÄîÌt¹zÀ «¼Á¸ÀzÀ°è £À£Àß PÀÄlÄA§ ¸ÀA¸ÁgÀzÉÆA¢UÉ ªÁ¹¸ÀÄwÛzÀÄÝ, ¸ÉÆêÉÄñÀégÀ UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬ÄwAiÀÄ ªÀiÁf CzÀsåPÀë£ÁVzÀÄÝ ©.eÉ.¦.AiÀÄ°è ¸ÀQæAiÀÄ£ÁV zÀÄrAiÀÄÄwÛzÉÃÝ£É. F ¢£À ¨É¼ÀUÉÎ ªÀģɬÄAzÀ £À£Àß ¨Á§ÄÛ CRX 1919ªÀiÁgÀÄw N«Ä¤ ªÁ夣À°è PÀÄvÁÛgÀÄ PÉÆÃgÀUÀdÓ£À PÀmÉÖUÉ PÉʪÀÄÄVAiÀÄĪÀgÉà ºÉÇgÀlÄ vÉÆPÉÆÌlÄÖ dAPÀà£ï zÁn ªÁå£À£ÀÄß ZÀ¯Á¬Ä¹PÉÆAqÀÄ §§ÄâPÀmÉÖ ±Á¯É ¸À«ÄÃ¥À vÀ®Ä¥ÀÅwÛzÀÝAvÉAiÉÄà »A¢¤AzÀ eÉÆÃgÁV ºÁ£ïð ºÉÆqÉAiÀÄÄvÁÛ zsÁ«¹ §gÀÄwÛzÀÝ ©½ ªÀiÁgÀÄw 800 PÁgÀ£ÀÄß UÀªÀĤ¹ ¥ÀjZÀAiÀÄzÀªÀgÀÄ AiÀiÁgÉÆà EgÀ¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ ¨sÁ«¹ £Á£ÀÄ ªÁå£À£ÀÄß ¤zsÁ¤¸ÀÄwÛzÀÝAvÉAiÉÄà »A¨Á°¹ §AzÀ ªÀiÁgÀÄw 800 PÁgÀ£ÀÄß £À£Àß ªÁå£ï JzÀÄgÀÄUÀqÉ ¤°è¹ PÁj¤AzÀ E§âgÀÄ AiÀÄĪÀPÀgÀÄ PÉÊUÀ¼À°è vÀ®ªÁgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß gÀÄsļÀ¦¸ÀÄvÁÛ £À£Àß §½UÉ zsÁ«¹ §AzÀªÀgÀ ¥ÉÊQ M§â£ÀÄ vÀ®ªÁj¤AzÀ £À£Àß PÀÄwÛUÉUÉAzÀÄ KPÁKQAiÀÄÁV PÀrzÁUÀ £Á£ÀÄ ¥ÀPÀÌ£É vÀ¯É JqÀ §¢UÉ §VθÀÄwÛzÀÝAvÉAiÉÄà vÀ®ªÁgÀÄ ¥ÉlÄÖ £À£Àß §®¨sÁUÀzÀ PÉ£ÉßUÉ §®ªÁV vÁV gÀPÀÛ ¸ÀÄj¬ÄvÀÄ. ªÀÄvÉÛ ªÀÄvÉÛ PÀrAiÀÄ®Ä - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 AiÀÄwß¹zÁUÀ £Á£ÀÄ fêÀzÁ¸É¬ÄAzÀ ªÁå£À£ÀÄß ºÀoÁvÀÛ£É »AzÀPÉÌ ¸Àj¹ CqÀتÁVnÖzÀÝ DgÉÆæUÀ¼À PÁgÀ£ÀÄß ºÁ¬Ä¹PÉÆAqÀÄ ªÀÄÄAzÉ PÀÄvÁÛjUÉ ºÉÆÃUÀÄwÛzÀÝAvÉAiÉÄà ªÀiÁgÀÄw 800 PÁj£À°èzÀÝ ªÀÄvÉÆÛ§â DgÉÆæ, PÁgÀÄ ZÁ®PÀ£ÀÄ PÀÆqÁ PÁj¤AzÀ E½¢zÀÄÝ, CªÀgÀ ¥ÉÊQ M§â¤UÉ £À£Àß ªÁå£ï »AzÀPÉÌ ¸Àj¸ÀĪÀ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄ vÁVgÀ¨ÉÃPÀÄ. £À£ÀUÉ ºÀ¯Éè ªÀiÁrzÀªÀ£ÀÄ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 5.3” JvÀÛgÀzÀªÀ¤zÀÄÝ, zÀ¥Àà ºÁUÀÄ UÀnÖªÀÄÄmÁÖzÀ AiÀÄĪÀPÀ¤zÀÄÝ, CªÀ£ÀÄ F »AzÉ ¥ÀAZÁAiÀÄvÀÄ D¦sùUÉ £Á£ÀÄ CzÀsåPÀë£ÁVzÁUÀ ¸ÀÆÌlgï£À°è qÉÆÃgï£ÀA§jUÉÆøÀÌgÀ §gÀÄwÛzÀÄÝ, ¥ÉsæAZï UÀqÀØ EnÖzÀÄÝ ªÀÄÄS ¥ÀjZÀAiÀÄzÀ ªÀÄĹèA DVzÀÄÝ, G½zÀªÀgÀÄ ªÀÆgÀÄ d£À PÀÆqÁ ªÀÄĹèAgÉà DVzÀÝgÀÄ. F £Á®ÄÌ d£ÀgÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄAzÉ £ÉÆÃrzÀgÉ UÀÄgÀÄw¸À§¯Éè£ÀÄ. F WÀl£É£ÀqÉzÁUÀ ¨É½îUÉÎ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 9.45UÀAmÉ DVgÀ§ºÀÅzÀÄ. £Á£ÀÄ gÀPÀÛ ¸ÀÄj¹PÉÆAqÀÄ ªÁå£ï ZÀ¯Á¬Ä¸ÀÄvÀÛ PÀÄvÁÛgÀÄ UÉÆÃ¥Á®gÀªÀgÀ CAUÀr §½ §AzÁUÀ C°è PÀÆ¥À® ¸ÀwñÀ EzÀÄÝ, CªÀgÀ dvÉ F D¸ÀàvÉæUÉ §AzÀ°è qÁPÀÖgÀgÀÄ ¥ÀjÃQë¹ aQvÉì ¤ÃqÀÄwÛzÀÄÝ, £Á£ÀÄ zÀsj¹zÀÝ CAV, ¥ÁåAlÄ, §¤AiÀÄ£ïUÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÁjUÉ PÀÆqÁ gÀPÀÛ vÁVzÀÄÝ, CªÀÅUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄAzÉ ºÁdgÀÄ ¥Àr¸ÀÄvÉÛãÉ. DgÉÆæUÀ¼É®ègÀÄ PÉÆ¯É ªÀiÁqÀĪÀ KPÉÆÃzÉÝñÀzÁzÀ ¥ÀƪÀðzÉéõÀ ¦ÃrvÀgÁV PÁj£À°è »A¨Á°¹ £À£Àß ªÁå£À£ÀÄß vÀqÉzÀÄ, PÀÄwÛUÉUÉAzÀÄ vÀ®ªÁj¤AzÀ PÀrzÁUÀ £Á£ÀÄ vÀ¯É¨ÁV¹zÀÄzÀjAzÀ PÀÄwÛUÉAiÀÄ UÀÄj vÀ¦à §®PÉ£ÉßUÉ vÁV UÀA©sÃgÀ¸ÀégÀÆ¥ÀzÀ UÁAiÀÄ GAmÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F PÀÈvÀåªÀ£ÀÄß zÁjºÉÇÃPÀgÀÄ £ÉÆÃrgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. DzÀÄzÀjAzÀ DgÉÆæUÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÝ ¸ÀÆPÀÛ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸À¨ÉÃPÁV C¥ÉÃPÉë.” 23. On the basis of the above complaint, the Mangalore Rural Police has registered the case in Crime No.27/2004 against four unknown Muslim youths for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 109, 120B, 153A, 307 IPC read with Section 149 of IPC and submitted the FIR to the Court on 30.01.2004 at 02.50 pm. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet against accused Nos.1 to 7 for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 109, 120B, 153A, 307 IPC read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 24. In Para No.7 of the judgment, it is observed that case against accused Nos.2 to 4, accused No.6 and 7 has been split up and the trial against accused No.1 and 5 has been held. 25. The trial Court has acquitted accused No.5-Abdul Nazir @ Nazzi for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 341, 109, 120B, 153A, 307 of Indian Penal Code read with 149 of Indian Penal Code. However, the trial Court has convicted accused No.1-Abdul Latif @ Badda Latif for the offences punishable under Section 153-A, 341 and 307 of Indian Penal Code. 26. PW1-Chandrashekara Uchilla has reiterated the averments made in the complaint. Further, he has deposed as to the identification of the material objects used for the commission of offence and has deposed that he has identified the accused before the Court. He tried to assault with a talwar/machet. Further he has deposed that another accused- Abdul Nazir was sitting in the Maruthi car in driver's seat. Further, he has deposed that on 24th or 25th March of 2004 the Tahasildar, Mangalore summoned him to Sub-Jail to identify the - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 accused in test identification parade. Accordingly, he went there and has identified all the accused, who have assaulted him. 27. The trial Court has observed in paragraph 39 that the Court was not satisfied for the test identification parade relied upon by the prosecution. Therefore, in this regard there is no need to discuss about the test identification parade said to have been conducted by the Investigating Officer. 28. CW2-Karunakara, CW3-Praveen Kuthar, CW4-Bharathraj, CW5-Subhash said to be the eye-witnesses examined as PW2 to PW5. The name of PW2 to PW5 has not been shown in the complaint. Even PW1 has not stated in his evidence that PW2 to PW5 have witnessed this incident. During the course of cross-examination PW2 has clearly admitted that he cannot say which talwar was used for the assault of Chandrashekara Uchila and he has not deposed in his evidence, on which date he has given statement to the Investigating Officer. 29. PW3-Praveen Kuthar has admitted in his evidence that after lapse of 2 days from the date of incident, the police - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 have enquired him and only then he came to know that Chandrashekara Uchila was assaulted. 30. PW4-Bharathraj has admitted that on the date of incident he did not visit to the hospital. After lapse of 2 days he went to the hospital and saw PW1. Further, he has admitted that, at the time of incident Praveen Kuthar has not accompanied with him. 31. PW5-Subhash has not deposed anything against accused No.1. 32. If, really accused No.1 has assaulted PW1 as deposed by him, he would have disclosed or at least would have given physical description of this accused in the complaint, but he has not done so. The other eye-witnesses have not given any intimation to the police as to the involvement of accused No.1 at the earliest point of time. 33. A careful examination of the entire evidence on record, I do not find any cogent, convincing, clinching, corroborative and trustworthy evidence before this Court and I do not find any evidence to constitute the offence under Section - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 153-A, 341 and 307 Indian Penal Code. Though there is no sufficient cogent and clinching legal evidence before the trial Court. However, the trial Court has convicted the accused for the commission of alleged offence, which is not sustainable under law. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 in the negative. Regarding point No.2: 34. For the foregoing reasons and discussions, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) Appeal is allowed. ii) The judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Court, D.K., Mangalore in S.C No.86/2004 dated 18.03.2014, is set aside. iii) Accused No.1-Abdul Latif @ Badda Latif/appellant is acquitted of the offence under Sections 153-A, 341 and 307 of Indian Penal Code. - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5052 CRL.A No. 400 of 2014 iv) The fine amount, if any, deposited by the appellant shall be returned to him in accordance with law. Registry is directed to send the copy of this judgment along with Trial Court records to the trial Court. Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE LDC, PHM, KBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37