High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Hosurappa S/O Puttaganabovi vs Sri Ramakrishna S/O Thimmaiah on 1 August, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri Hosurappa S/O Puttaganabovi vs Sri Ramakrishna S/O Thimmaiah on 1 August, 2008
Author: Subhash B.Adi
III THE HIGH COURT OF KARXIATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 13'? DAY OF AUGUST, 2008
BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR'.JUS'I'ICE SUBHASH B.AD--E.  

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION 1~;::>;»V1}:2:3A61.f.2i3§7"J(--'L ~«    

 =

Sn’. Hosurappa

Sfo. Puttaganabovi,

Aged about 71 ycars,

Occ: Agriculturist,

Bittanalmnike Vfllaga, . , _ –_ 3 L’ A =
Ma<:i}1ugiri'I'a1uk. _*…V..i"-fETi'I'iONER

(By Sr;

1. Sri. Rama1uishfia_*vV v ”
S/0. _ ‘
Aged about .34 years,
Qcc: Cooiic Wgrisz. ._

– – SI’i- Géngaiaiu …… 14

.V sgq. -<":*hippa5ah«
I _Agcd-» about«28,yr:a1's,

— S/0. Nadupamzta

-. ‘Aged a}3i:-;1fi~42 years,
“$00116: Work

‘ ‘*c:fi11camsh

“S/cg. Rangappa
.. “Agassi about 25 years
Lvflcc: Conlie Work.

Sn’.Ve1:1katappa.

S] 0. Sannathimmaiah
Aged about 50 years,
000: Coolie Work.

10.

11.

E2.

, Agcdaboiit 40 years. _

13.”

Sri. Anjinappa

S/0. Thippaiah @ Hanumantharayappa
Aged about 25 yeam

Occ: Cooljae Work.

Smt. Gangamma

W] 0. T

Aged about 30 years
(300: Agriculturist.
Smt Pramila

W] 0. Rainakrishnappa
Aged about 26 years
Occ: Coolie Work.

Smt. Gangarnma
W] o. Venkatappa
Agcd about 45 years
Occ: Coolie Wcwrk.

Sri. Sreenivasa V

S10. Vc11ka1appa4 ‘ .
Aged about 21 ‘
Dec: Colic W{:I”i~:”v ‘

Aged abé.-mt go ”

Occ: Coulis Vv’.’o1’k.
Sri. xnshnaippa ‘. ” , _
SI 0. Mangalavaéndi Gangappa

‘Oc;::V’Ag’Iié’1=:1ti11jist

AHé1ufi1:Ii£ii 1t!1éaI:=;yappa

Aged about 24 years

V Occ: Hferk.

“~’~__ F£cspond~:r;fts I to 13 are
R/'<9: LBi e Village,

2 gflodgieigi Hobli, Madl1ugiI'i'I'a1uk,

District.

%-Madhum
‘ ‘ ” ‘i’umkur District.

State by hdadhugiri Police Station,

. RESPONDENTS

(By Sri. E). R. Ananéeeswara, Adv. for R1-R13,
Sri. Homlappa, HCGP for R14)

nu.—.-

This CILRP is fiicd [US .397 RIW 401 of Cr.P.C. praying
to set aside the acquittal judgrnent passed in C.C.No.621/06 on

the file of the Addlcivil Judge (Jr.D1:1.) 85 JMFC1, Madhugixi,

Dt.04.08.i2006.

This revisimcx petition coming on for acimissicm «’ A4

the Court made the following:
onnsn _M_

This revision is against the judgmcnfogf

2. The accused were chargti Sh§.’.etcdr. fgx-, éffences
punishable under Sections 143. é:;~$.4_~4£§.% 427.
325, 504, 505 R/W Secfion 1495:’ =

3. Case of the p1’§a’@utig3I1″i.Lé.:i:11.’;tt,._:§at pan. on
19.2.20Q6 at came near the
house of fefijfiing themselves into an
tmlawful assemBuI3:._’_’and Jcomplainant on the ground
that. he givfen the” on behalf of PW?’ against the

aécusedf and thereafter, they assaulted the

caused grievous I-“Ws.2. 3 and

v£iv1_3.o intéivcngéci, were alsa assaulted by the accuseci.

H u In. 4_su1;§port of the prosecution case. 13W 1 to PW12 have
and Exs.Pl to P22 were marked in the evidence

V , V’ to 3 were produced.

5. PWS.1. 3 and 7 alleged to be the injured Wimesseg. PW}

stated that, he became unconscious due to the injury. However,