IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALQRE E DATED "THIS THE 19TH DAY 01-" MAI2(}jIji'::2;'G(."i8.:" E R THE J'u'S"'FI"'E INA ' BETWEEN 1.
‘S.Madhusudan,
Es/o (Late) s.Iycngar, %
Ex.D’ircctor of M,'”s– é*.r_.;c.-:*: 3;: ;
C;::mn1unications.L_iIJ1itt::1′,’ ” ”
Plot No. 101,
6*” Majn§.R&a’d§ C
6th CI’QSS”Rdad–, Iv1a11éshwa1′-SE11, » j-
Bwzgalcre-136O A V *
E
Sf-0 (Eats)
Ex. Djrccto1′-of—‘M,/ s” -‘A1160
-A mmirmjnicati-rxrrs Liiliiiffifi,
30.468, 6.”? Cross. 2fld=B1ock,
Nagar’; ….. .. e
, Bmig§1c1jc–560 032.. . : ‘. etiticncrs
‘(By Patii, Advocate]
~+_Vishni1..AIya.
8-1; 439, Janakpuri, ._ –
KNEW Delhi-110058. _ : Rc§pt;__d__.nt _
This C1’iII1iI1a.1 Revision Petition is filed undersection
‘ 397 r/w 401 C’,-r.P.C praying tc set _aside’ th.ei~vJ’tidg;”u1ent
and sentence of the Sessions Judge, Fast ~QUilIte.VII,
Bangalore in Cr1.A.No.610/2004 dated 528- 10–‘2G05″*’
Judgment and sentence of the XVI Vir1..__
C. C.No.35O 12 / 2002 dated 22–O?»2O(A)4.’_4
This petition coming on 3
Court, made the foI1owing:r
At the time oiiisisrisg tl1c’1*ex(ision petition it is
seen from the._0-d..1i..she’.».t ‘111aL;t;ai1;ed, L13’, the trial Cccrt
tn-“t 0’3 13;7?–2§Zi’O{i, ..ti1e1aceuised'”ffied”‘an application under
Section P.W.1 and another
applicationd’di1i1de1*i -311 Cr.P.C. to lead defence
evidence ‘I’11eV’ease stood’ adjourned to 15-7-2004 f_r _.1i1_g
ohieeticns a1. 1 en ‘.5=’.7=2004 accused was “resert an’
were ffled and the matter was stood
hearing of the application on 16-7-2004.
16vs«7-.2hV()04 accused addressed arguments and the
.. Adlliastterddwas posted for orders to 20-7-2004.
.LL,
‘ h’nitt”d 1- t L11 ‘ccused took the date
{‘0
I–1
9”?’
L as 27-7-2004 instead Of 20-7-2004 on which day the trial
5LDs;»\sii.I¢——
Court has passed an order on the two applioatiozisffled by
the petitioners/accused, rejecting the appheatioiifi tinder
Section 311 for recalling P.W.1 V”
‘ 2-_V__<,_
was alhwed. On the ve1y dayvitiietrial
the defence of the accusefiexas nili" vvas absent.
Arguinents are theVAco111p1ainant
was also absent, 'Vito 21='.7a2OO4 on
1_x,r]_M_r;" day colnpiainant were
absent. xiwas not ready the case
was edjeméiieeyetttees22d;*r..2oo4. On 22-7-2004 both the
accused'-and the eerxlgjiaiilailt were absent, But 11o.=v.ve1*,
the ; jnd_or1-_ent– came to be pronounced eo'_"v1'-ting the
se"tencing him for an offence punishable
A of the N.I. Act.
.3′-.V”l”he absence of both the parties right from
2 ., ‘2G»7.-2004 and even on the d_a_e of nonouneeinent of th”
j’1n.g111e11t i.e. 22~7-2004 reveals that they had mistakenly
it ttteken the date as 27–7..2oo4 instead of 20-7-2004. Hence
anpl ca on e_nder Section 311 fez’ le;”‘c.1-Hg (‘3-.e1-._ 1eevv.£i3’rie:ie11ce*-._
co.r1victiefip;1.iA’pea11d sentence passed _against 11
the reading of the order sheet reveals ‘L”__t .’11eug’a__ the
application filed by the petit.ione1_’s_/ accused .
e’..de.1.,e 11-13 been allowed a fair o_pportu___nity beeifi
aI'”‘1″‘ded t” 11i111 te lead .\.1idenee:V”a11d’ ‘establish his ‘ease,
‘I
«tea
The said fact though a1’gued_
o”i’e.u:” ~ _t11e nest ~ appeimta _
Court 110 finding has been on the ea111e.”j,”_as such’
since there is no opportunity. giiren to the
petitioners ,1 aeeussed, 1_..feel–.V the ordef ‘ Cef conviction and
sentence 11y, “11”i “idem. _.Qf_._1L1.i.IE.tO be set
aside the’7a1attei*_ie be”‘i”e1:i1ai1ded t’ the t1’i*” Court
for being of recording the evidence of
§.’..,-(.’.–L1_Sf_!d. sueh the»
~ ..v’I’i1e,1″etrisio11 petition? is aiiewed; The -rd..r of
petiti¢)i1erefi/accused for an offence punishable under
:~T_”‘ 138 of the N.I. Act passed by the trial Court as
iaffirrned D ‘ the i””*t a”pe..a.e Vet. .. is set aside. The
__!J.1
matter is remanded to the trial Court W1 1 a d ‘eetieii to
proceed with the case from the stage of recordiijgeof the
evidence of the petitioners/ accused. ” the
petitioners] accused submit that he wi11;iec.éll§1,g””.,.
of P.W .1 who is 1′)1T’;S61″1t1″ o”t of coLui’¥i’y} “iris de..,o1ca1″‘–«
that the petitio11e1’s /’ accused SI’1.”:lV.H ‘I”1’Ot aslefoxfd4;4ecéJ1h’1g::of
P.W.1. The application fi1edv’Vii1_Vi;de;f Sectioji’ before this
Ho11’b1e Court is to Court for necessary
orders. Exe111pt1o1- 13e….__,,_o_11-;d 1,. “PI; ‘;51,* co:-.1plaina:mt from
Crgac.
as
3 mm: Crl.R.P. 190612665″ 6
11-4-2003 _
éaanm are same 6
r””anded 6 “*6 ‘V”6a§§’6’no féir..dp;$oI’iiunity was
given m the “etiticners *” “;6=”a.s}..’V6.ji*::’s.r”u’;””–11Lcx’:A’.A It”}W”s also
LIL- _pp.1ca….Q.; “leg ..,y}t.’4′.’:e-;:_’:¢6.’,.r.’..1.”i..{.’I1ers U/S. 391
C3r.P.C.,.before his Cqurt should be dec-1;;–_ _y 1:11.. t_._l
4-… “‘
that stigh ‘ 1v’,;_ ‘6 have
“‘irst Appcfiate
– _-._..d. by ….c
‘ As such, the order dated
19.63.2663 fa “extent”. directing the trial court to pass
I”:
3″‘d”a
y the order dated 19.n3,2ooa,m¢ 156666