High Court Karnataka High Court

Havaji @ Nanaso vs Shri Arihant Cr Souhard Sahakari … on 29 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Havaji @ Nanaso vs Shri Arihant Cr Souhard Sahakari … on 29 June, 2009
Author: N.Ananda


21*: THE HIGH (2083? or KARNATAKA.

cmcurr 31:-me:-1 AT nnmwm % 7 L”

DATED “nus THE 29:11 DAY 0? .m:’.m: _: ”

THE Hownm Maqvsficé A’

CRHVHNAL REVISION 15x-3%:§’ i*:*:oH im;26%6e}goo9

BETWEEN:

1, 311111 E-iavaji @VNa11,a’S’c”,’ Szov.’ sfadafian§1’i»”‘ M
Pavale, Agt::’}.. VL§2ea1tist_, R/sf Raj;§r1i1V{}__aI}i
Rt: P0: HG;Q.aga_,_-_B6lga_umz

T31: Diéét: Bélgénim.

_ _ _’ …fi~”‘ETITIONER
{E}? Sri _ 3-ff2§I1j’L3I1af1i’-L3$§€§§§{i,_ nAi§.vocat€s)

$3.3′: -V

” V’ 1. «gm; f’s”:’:”.h$n,t <21: Sé:§ii1:;.a1fi Sahakari Lind.
» VBorgagx1«,.VE3§§ga'um, Repressfzntad by its
VVE';IIl}V3'}*T)§f":i'-§ 'Shri. Sudhakar Dramosciar

.P{;.»t_a<:1a:'«, ;~'gge:~;:$8 years, R/0. Belgaum

* .; .RESP0!5II}EN'I'

This citminal mxrision pfiiitiflfl ig fies} under secfiam

R'/'X? 333.401 ef C'.r.?.C praying to aliow this mvision and

Sci aside the judgméfit and arder passer} by the Hazfbia i

u "'Rc:id1. Sessians Judge, Belgaum in C;:*i.A E'€0.}18f20{)'?

é:.28,:.2(}CQ confirmiag the juégmam and Qrder of
czsnviction in CC E%}'0.438/2606 ét.16.4,,2G{}'? by the Honfiie
&P~§F{Z EV Ealgaum,

This revision petition ceming on far mficrs th-:33 day,

the Court made the fellowing:

There are concuntm fmdifibgs Qf 4*£z.e:’1<3§i% .§}1;é1t '

pfififififlfil" has <:cmmittcdVua3_:1 0fi'e:.z_:1C€: p11;1is:h.eible: :}uif1§ic 1-* L.

Ssction 138 af Negotiable insigigfiiafits fiict,

'2. The Trig} <31} of cvick-mes cf

camylainani §r<:}v€d 3}} the

ingztfiiifirgts ,£';if ~5£*l:JL'"1::4€::fi'.C5'i3:é.t?:'*._COIEfimitt€d undar Section 138 of

Negufiabfic E:1sti':1$»f::1t$."':"§ci:.

The gf*iafet+'s:a§";C«3 of petitianer is that he had 31$: ham:

V :g:i%F*:;1'v–$_i1Tf%€1:£"i:€£:t Qpportunity bafsre the Trial {30u.ri. it is $5311

.' tf11& f;i:§;iiigm€n'£ sf Trig}; COELEYE that §€:tit§Gn:::r 113$ 113$:

avaiitstdl épgzsartuaitias given to him. Apart {mm this,

" §é;–f§fioncr fiid 1191: have any tsnabie éeffincé b€f0I"fi this Trial

Caurt.

4. The §I’S’§ Ap§eI.Ea£e C9111″: 0:1 mappreciatim; of

fi’.?i{i6Ii€€,’ has cenfirmfid the findings Gf the Trial _C»z::urt.

W. Cxévummdw W;

(ml

5. In Vi€W of cancurraui: fnldings recorded by ”
Cifiurts ¥:3a1ova, it is 116668831}? to refar ta 3 éeciSi:3:3¢raj;§e0rt@:§::j};’V:»’¢
£31 A13»? 3999 SC 981 (in. the me cf S£€zte ‘qf :{,?}<':e?':¥az(g~.;,_;§.;,.,',
Puéiumana Ilfaih Jatluzwedan Nambam:§$:':;;, u.%m;emu T'<:.2;sa'.._ """
Supmme Caurt has helézw V '
'*5. Ordinalély, fl1€'2"§"":ff"f':-i}3".fi'5,"~I_f'1;€')'{'
56 apprepriate for gjthfi '–.Cx3r:1;¥;
appmp3:'iate- {ha cxziticzggfk: §';r::* "{n€"<v'E«:§"'–i't;':._.??%§é11
conclusion on thé vf':"'-'fi{?;:'f?}33{;§f3 hafi
aireaiiy §}€€:1__ V_;;;p§3:":::<:*i,;#ift;§§iV " $§gi$§:I'ate as
W621 as the S§es§i§a§fi$'V;.f1§d;%gl§é t;1'ilt:.:$$ any
gigging featiiré' is notice Bf the
§~–:;«;g::s'__' €V;3{";1,:§{*iT _{?§§.i:§:.i{:§$:'_:x;ro:1}:i aiiiemxfise iamtammizzfi
' 3;). grésa of jugiiaté. C231 acmfiflizizgg
V '::§:.& i3npug£iéi£"g£adgm¢:3§ ct" {Em High, C0111": from
gffiiifsaid s':a:"1:E»pe§:1t, wa banks 119 fiegitation
A' the {:03-633333 that the Eiigh Court
axe-eéziéd its jmiséiction :3; interfering '€3'£'"i,1;h the
*~ éénvicfiefi 9f the respondegat by r€—-ap§r€:r::§,a.t§:1g
{$3 $13}. evidence, Thfi High Caurt 5:130
: Cfimmittfid furtimz' array iii moi axamixaing severai
iiems of cviéenm raiiefi awn bf; ihs': Adéitéanai
Sfissiims Judgefi whfie C2;1fiz”ming {he mmrisfiaa
sf the respatzdém, £1: this vim? of tbs maitsr, the

impugiieti juégmant af $21.6 Rigéa {Emmi is; $§?§1€3i§}?

W S ~ W’-“*’€i,«»—7./.

tmsustajxzahlfi: in iaw and we, acconiingifi ‘ 3&5». V

aside the: same: ”

6. On recensidcratian of figs 1§:::;43.«ti_.af,_ i _11c51:’:i–.V

Qourts below have not ccV2111;m.itté1″.éeti{:ia3iA«.is%._dié:1Iz.i}.§t§ed at ‘£113 stage of

» JUDGE

gahzfi’