Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 48005 (KAR)

SATYANARAYANA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.A/694/2017 · 2026-01-12

H P Sandesh, Venkatesh Naik T

Criminal Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1662-DB CRL.A No. 694 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.694 OF 2017 (A) BETWEEN: SATYANARAYANA S/O. NARAYANAIAH AGRICULTURIST AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESIDING AT MAJJIGENAHALLI BADRAVATHI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577 301. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SHREYAS A.P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY RURAL POLICE STATION BADRAVATHI TALUK - 577 301. 2. CHANDRAPPA S/O. MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. 3. ANNAPPA S/O. MALLAPPA Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1662-DB CRL.A No. 694 of 2017 AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 ARE AGRICULTURISTS AND ARE RESIDING AT MAJJIGENAHALLI BADRAVATHI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577 301. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDITIONAL SPP FOR R-1; SRI B.S. PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 AND R-3) * * * THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 372 OF THE CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 18-2-2017 PASSED BY THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SHIVAMOGGA SITTING AT BHADRAVATHI IN SESSIONS CASE NO.226 OF 2011 AND CONVICT THE ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 2 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 307, 504 AND 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND GRANT COMPENSATION AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER SECTION 357 OF CR.P.C. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1662-DB CRL.A No. 694 of 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH) Learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo seeking permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal, which also bears the signature of the appellant - Sri Sathyanarayana. In view of the fact that learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 does not dispute the contents of the memo and the appellant is also present before the Court, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the appeal. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16