- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 457 OF 2026 BETWEEN: SRI. PAVAN N.S, AGED 32 YEARS, SON OF SRI. NINGANNA RESIDING BEHIND MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, ARASIKERE TOWN - 573 103, HASSAN DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N. JAGADISH BALIGA, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ARASIKERE TOWN POLICE STATION, ARASIKERE - 573 103 HASSAN DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 R/W 401 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 438 R/W 442 BNSS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND THEREBY SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER DTD 24.01.2026 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT HASSAN IN CRL.A.NO.79/2025 AND THEREBY SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DTD 04.06.2025 PASSED BY THE SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT ARASIKERE IN C.C.NO.132/2023 AND THEREBY ACQUIT THE PETITIONER OF ALL CHARGES. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri N.Jagadish Baliga, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Sri K.Nageshwarappa, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 2. Though the matter is listed for admission by consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal. 3. The revision petitioner is the accused, who suffered an order of conviction in C.C.No.132/2023 for the offence punishable under Section 392 of IPC, confirmed in Crl.A.No.79/2025 and ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/-. 4. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present case are as under: Smt. Shakuntala W/o Sri Dhananjaya lodged a complaint with Arsikere Town Police Station stating that on 01.12.2022 at about 05.30 p.m., she had offered a tea to the petitioner and Lingappa. The petitioner and Lingappa visited the house of the complainant for drinking water. Lingappa after drinking the water, went out of the house and it is the present petitioner who was acquainted with - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 the complainant being the tenant of the neighbouring house, stayed there for accepting the offer of tea. 5. After consuming the tea given by the complainant, he stood there and straight all of a sudden tried to snatch the gold chains worn by the complainant. In the process, the mangalya chain worn by the complainant was broken and revision petitioner managed to take a chain weighing about 25 grams with a pendant thereon. 6. Immediately, the complainant came out of the house raising alarm. On hearing the hue and cry of the complainant, inmate of the neighbouring house namely Lilly and others gathered there and they consoled her. The matter was also reported to the husband of the complainant and after he came home, they decided to lodge a complaint against the petitioner. 7. The Town Police, on receipt of the complaint, registered a case and investigated the matter and apprehended the petitioner. When the accused was in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 custody, he has given the voluntary statement; pursuant to which, the Investigation Officer secured the presence of two independent punch witnesses and all of them proceeded to the Muthoot Finance office situated in the Arsikere Town and after visiting the said office, the accused pointed out the Manager, who identified the accused. 8. On enquiry, the gold chain which was snatched from the neck of the complainant, was pledged with the said finance company, which was recovered by the Investigation Officer in the presence of punch witnesses vide recovery mahazar marked at Ex.P9 and thereafter completed the investigation and filed the charge sheet. 9. Presence of the accused was secured by trial judge, who was enlarged on bail on 21.12.2022. After his arrest on 08.12.2022 and charges were framed. The accused pleaded not guilty. Therefore, trial was held. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 10. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, prosecution proceeded to examine seven witnesses comprising of the complainant her neighbour Lilly Clara, Punch witnesses, Investigation officer and the Manager of Muthoot Finance. The prosecution placed on record 19 documents which are exhibited and marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P19, comprising of complaint, spot mahazar, photographs, certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, indemnity bond, seizure mahazar, photographs, cash paid receipt, FIR, property tax extract, voluntary statement of the accused and rough sketch of the place of incident. 11. After conclusion of recording the evidence of the prosecution, the learned Trial Magistrate recorded the statement of the accused as is contemplated under Section 313 of the CrPC, wherein the accused has denied all the incriminatory circumstances but did not offer any explanation for the recovery of the chain under Ex.P9. Thus, the learned Trial Magistrate convicted the accused - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 for the offence under Section 392 of the IPC, believing the oral testimony and recovery of the snatched chain. 12. Being aggrieved by same, the accused filed an appeal before the II Additional District and Sessions Court at Hassan in Crl.A.No.79/2025. 13. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court, after securing the records, heard the arguments of the parties in detail and on re-appreciation of the material evidence on record, dismissed the appeal of the accused by confirming the judgement and order of sentence passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Arsikere in C.C.No.132/2023. 14. Being further aggrieved by the same, the accused is before this Court in this revision. 15. Sri N. Jagadish Baliga, learned counsel for the revision petitioner, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition would vehemently contend that the genesis of the crime is not properly explained by the prosecution - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 inasmuch as according to the complaint averments, chain was broken and what is recovered under Ex.P9 is the complete chain as could be seen from the photographs placed on record by the prosecution. Therefore, the benefit is to be transferred to the accused and sought for an order of acquittal. 16. He would further contend that the chain that has been recovered under Ex.P9 is not the mangalya chain and therefore, there is a discrepancy in the complaint averments, oral testimony of PW.1 and the contents of E.P9, and such discrepancy should enure to the benefit of the accused and therefore, sought for allowing the revision petition. 17. Alternatively, Sri N.Jagadish Baliga, learned counsel for the revision petitioner would contend that, in the event, this Court upholding the order of conviction, taking note of the fact that accused was in custody from 08.12.2020 to 21.12.2022 may be treated as a period of - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 imprisonment as admittedly accused is a first time offender and by enhancing the fine amount reasonably. 18. Per contra, Sri K.Nageshwarappa, learned High Court Government Pleader opposes the revision grounds by contending that recovery of the gold chain which was snatched from the neck of the complainant from Muthoot finance itself would complete the case of the prosecution in establishing the offence alleged against the accused under Section 392 of IPC especially in the absence of any explanation offered by the accused and thus, sought for dismissal of the revision petition. 19. Insofar as alternate submission is concerned, Sri N.Nageshwarappa would contend that no lenience or mercy can be shown to the people like revision petitioner which would send a wrong message to the society besides encouraging the similarly placed perpetrators of the crime and thus sought for the dismissal of the revision petition in toto. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 20. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material law on record meticulously. 21. On such perusal of the material on record, the recovery of the snatched chain from Muthoot Finance vide Ex.P9 is an important document, which would be sufficient enough to establish the case of the prosecution. 22. According to the complaint, the accused visited the house of the complainant along with Lingappa in the guise of asking for drinking water and thereafter, Lingappa went out and it is the accused who stayed alone and after consuming the tea offered by the complainant, all of a sudden, he tried to snatch the chains worn by her. 23. The complainant managed to catch hold of the mangalya chain which was broken. But accused was successful in snatching a gold chain, which was recovered under Ex.P9. Admittedly, after snatching the chain, the accused has visited the Muthoot Finance and pledged the same stating that it belongs to his mother. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 24. In fact, the accused was a previous customer to Muthoot Finance, as earlier he had pledged the ear studs belonging to his mother and borrowed the money. Therefore, the Muthoot Finance did not get any suspicion with regard to the accused pledging the gold chain with pendant. The statement of the manager in this regard and the contents of Ex.P9 would amply establish the recovery of the chain, which is found in Ex.P5 photograph. 25. The interim custody of the chain was handed over under the indemnity bond and thereafter, the same was marked through the photographs. 26. There is no dispute with regard to the recovery of the chain from the Muthoot Finance and so also identity of the accused is not in dispute inasmuch as he was the tenant of PW.2, which is the neighbouring house of the complainant. Taking note of these aspects of the matter, especially in the absence of any explanation offered by the accused nor any claim being lodged with regard to the - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 chain that has been recovered from the Investigation Agency from Muthoot Finance under Ex.P9, all ingredients to attract the offence under Section 392 of IPC should establish which has been rightly appreciated by both the Courts while recording an order of conviction against the revision petition under Section 392 of IPC. 27. Taking note of the limited powers of the Revisional Jurisdiction, this Court cannot revisit into the factual aspects of the matter and therefore, order of conviction is to be upheld. 28. This would take this Court to the next limb of the argument namely showing lenience to the accused. 29. Sri N. Jagadish Baliga, learned counsel would contend that the accused is an first time offender. The same is not disputed by the State. 30. In a matter of this nature, the role of the Court while passing an order of conviction is altogether different from the role that is to be played at the time of passing - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 the appropriate sentence in a given case. Such role having been played by the Trial Magistrate is not forthcoming while considering the order regarding sentence. Restating the facts which has been placed by the State as well as the learned counsel for the petitioner is not the discussion with regard to the application of mind while passing the order of sentence. 31. No reason is forthcoming as to why two years imprisonment and fine of Rs.20,000 is ordered by the Trial Magistrate. 32. Therefore, taking note of these aspects of the matter, if the custody period already undergone by the accused from 08.12.2022 to 21.12.2022 and treated as period of imprisonment by enhancing the fine amount in a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- excluding the sum of Rs.20,000 ordered by the Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court, ends of justice would be met. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 33. Portion of the fine amount can also be paid as compensation to PW.1, which would further serve the ends of justice. 34. Accordingly, following: ORDER i. The Revision Petition is allowed in part. ii. While maintaining the conviction of the accused for the offence under Section 392 of IPC, the custody period is already undergone by the accused is a period of imprisonment by enhancing the fine amount in a sum of Rs.1,25,000/-. The said enhanced fine amount shall be payable on or before 20.05.2026. iii. Failure to pay the enhanced fine amount on or before 20.05.2026 would result in the restoration of the sentence ordered by the Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court automatically. iv. On receipt of the enhanced fine amount for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- is ordered to be paid as - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20923 CRL.RP No. 457 of 2026 compensation to PW.1 under due identification. v. 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 SSB