EN THE HIGH C§:wR*r4Q»F 1<AR:m*.é{}.' 4' M
DATEEE "EH13 THEs';2:2.1?'_§3 aé;*a:,_ 0'f:5' quixgiez 3
THE ;§0N'i§3:;E Mi_ié;}fij$*fi_5;§E;«N_.AN}§§e1§¥A
;::2:M1N1é;;,V;é.§éF1E:}§:;V N0;i';2?':;;$;!~2o03
BE*mzEEN:i
The State » A.g>;:eEfam"L
(By P. gay.)
-AN§: "
::¢.*:%g0udé:;, ' V -
S1}-9 Si'§1Shivai13gg1;6;.a Patil,
Age: 5%'iTrIaj€):.1.
i "*i'><2<::--. F$Kr:'*3eér¢taty,
' " }31*$_tf$&a_Vyaa?a$aya Sahakali,
. Sangh' §_.;'_t<1.'gj'
'§:§ana:;~:§... "-- '
Ric E-{Aa1ia$i, Tq: Navalgund. Rsspondani:
'A Narasingsa P. Singri, Adv.)
This crimizial apwal is fikéé tmdar sactian 3783} and
(3) of Cr.P.C§ praying to set: asida this judgment: ané orzier cf
' acquitta dated 3.3.2033 passed by the Esamezi £1 Adéi.
Sessions Judge, Bharwad, in (3r1.A.Na.98/"1998, and etc'
This appeal coming an far haaréng this éay, the Ci:-urt
gassed the fallowingi
: 2 ;
JUECSEMENT
The triai court had convicjgpjd acc-uazaufli fifffiééfi u
pmzzishabla under section 408 §PC;;_:;I'}1fi?4I"f'3.}§'J;E' ¥33.
accustsd had filed cr:.A.9a;'9;_s b'e§9§e
Sa$$i¢:m$.}11dge at Dhazwaezi. _ _ i
2. me Leamed, Judgé-:" 5: I Appeflata Court
1.
nthaiE’ Qadverting to on record has
€-=-e–»-a1, . /E.v1?EC{i\~ » ‘
&s;sed> the fz§:dii:a;.g of tI’ia1jcc>1;ft ‘
an (}f’feI1cc§’f)3;5V’;.*z.is:i1:3i’Lj}é: ‘t1:ad€rV_S*:C’:i03<1. 468 EPC. '}'he learncd
L accused of
Judge iiourt, follewing tha Judgment of
this; 'mm ::f1's'ca§e+;: er State of PS! (1 85 0;, Arathctni
" Vsfi "" Pam! " ' A alik Annappa Garag (reported ia
has held that rfispondantj accuseé
wag W-;11'iri1§gA as a Sccrstaxy in Ceoperative Sosiatg and in '
sziaw A1' ths praviaions centendaé under Sectisn I 1 1 0?"
.§€Zaf:7:ataka Coragerativc Seciatics Aug 1§59, he shmiid 130%
fiave bean pmsrszcuied without abtaining previmig sanefiexx in
'terms af S£i"':{:§{}II 111(2) sf Fiaznataka Cgopéraiéve Sfiiifififififi
'E
fisct, 1959 {U
:3:
3. In View of coniliciing £i€CiSi£3l1S’V.'{‘§}j}Qf’§€’I;% “5;1
1974(2) Ka1′.L.J SH 245 {in the case of
vs. Mallaiahi and decision)’ j”iep9;:%gd §oG2§«’=:) A
Ka:.L.J.409 (referred supra): the ‘wa§.;%;’fAg.rre:{VV
banch. The £1131 bench N, K’.
Jain, Justice Sm V, :3 SaI;:}3’31’gif;–#i1c$.J1#1$ii<;e Moixarxa.
Shanthanagoudar ham;-:' ¥;e1fi under Section
1 1 1 of the Ac}: 4§S;'13.Qt the accused for
an effszncgf: IPC. Thf? Full
Bench tzaé t1pi1;..»_«fi};}§yi:zii3I3 Bench of this Court in
case (reported in 2OG2[4]
K9:,t;j.{;'.J,40§1"'E1§3isV'110ii laid down comet law and tha F111};
'' B;éi1a::h" VA1;:9;si'«,.._overru1e{i tbs fiivision Bencifs decisiafi in
{}arge's case. The F111} Beach has
fipprovfifi 3392* Laid (imvn in that: éecision of this Cmiri: in
gajss ;3'f..:'*§tate of Myfifilfi V3. Maiiaiah' The decision 0f the fa}:
is regretted in HR. 2394 FEAR; @439.
4. in the case an hand, the ieajzneci Sfi’:$Sit:)I}§~:
Juége, while ::onf1rmmg the finciings ef the Tttiaé 32:11:”: that
r€s§;:1dm1*i had mummified an ::::%:TZ:’1:;1<i:& punighable uzrdars
:4:
Stiction 408 WC has acquitted responclem
groaimi that sajzction undsr Section 111 wasV_A ‘I2Qt Afo{‘btai:ied,
The learned S€S$i€)Zt1S Judge {ff
this Court reported in 2002(4)’ Kax;LfJ;4o9,Tu%’;:%;{¢h ‘ha’s;é3e§nV.%
subsequently ovcirrulad by t1?.’ét5’L»§¥1.%:r:ti$i011V BWe11ch cf
this cam reporteti :33 11,12 22664 -4439.,’
5* Th§:’;”¢fo1’e:..~1″a–::ij (if éiafiéidémd opixzieu that
the ilnpugnésiu VV§ié:tained.. Thfi matter
mqu§1*i:5:é$”ie. to {}f1t:”1%ar:1ed Ssssions Judge for
mcongifiémiiafi. 2 2 . _
‘ ” ‘V in Vthér: z’éSu1£, E pass the foliewing:
QRQER
V fiiiixfiifixgned judgment is set asifie, T135 mattar is
flack :0 the 1€8_I’I1€:(i ii Aédi. Scissiens Judge, far
AA mcéfigiflemfian of appeal an misfits in afisordance vgith haw’
Sd/-3
JUDGE
“‘s11b/