{"id":178991,"date":"2009-07-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009"},"modified":"2016-01-15T08:27:01","modified_gmt":"2016-01-15T02:57:01","slug":"tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: A.S.Pachhapure<\/div>\n
1 CARP 8i\u20ac}!.'Z906\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT'I3i%N{\u00a73\u00a7\u00a30I!\u00a7.E--IA  4_\n\nDATED THIS THE 0613 \u00a7_3,A.Y_OF IIIJLY\u00ab?2\u00a7Ira13.3anya Bhat, HCGP.)\n\n I \" '  Criminal Revision Pe\ufb01tion is fikcd under Scc\ufb01on 40}.\n j 'C12 to set aside the judgment of conviction and sentcnce of\n\n 1;Ii3.2oo5 in C.C..No. 34012003 and the judgment and or\u00e9er.\n \"tit. 29.11.2035 passed by the f)ist., as S..J., Davangcre in\n Crl.A.l'\u20aco. 137\/ 2005.\n\nThis Criminal Revision Pe\ufb01\ufb01on coming on for hearing,\nthis day, the Court, made the following:\n\n\n\n2 CIi.R.P 81 032906\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n
The peiitioner has challenged his  <\/p>\n
sentence for the oifcnoes under Sections  oi: j  <\/p>\n
a Ina’ : held by the JMFC, channaggpi,   <\/p>\n
before the Sessions Court.\n<\/p>\n
2. The facts rclcxiam fqr”i;’11eL- purp0V’ “L ._sc of  revision are
\nas under: H ‘ ‘  V A V <\/p>\n
PW. 1 B,s:\u00e9gmy is; a g \ufb01\u00e9.idegi*v\u00a7jjf. Colony of channagxi
\nTaluk a3:ad=:’   .__a\ufb01 _Pb-\u00a7stV.–Mastcr \u00a311 Chaxmcshpur
\nV11′ Iage; “””   \u00e9;)n1plction of his Work, he
\naiongwith  Raja;  on the katta of the temple of<\/p>\n
Chowdar\ufb01ina\u00e9\u00e9 Go\u00a7Id_\u00a7s~.3  at about 9.30 p.m., the accused<\/p>\n
 , ‘_     quarreiling with the complainant<\/p>\n
  Why he talks with his Wife frcqucn\ufb02y and the<\/p>\n
  that his wife is the foxmer President of the<\/p>\n
 ‘}?$1icii1ayath and the pmsent member anti Whenever he<\/p>\n
H u  \u00e9goxviie work, ha has to talk with her and that it should net<\/p>\n
.’  ‘L~ c  \ufb01istakcn. While the complainant was answermg, the<\/p>\n
 “accused at once tack out 3. scissor and made an attempt to<\/p>\n
assault on his chest. In an c\ufb01iart ta escape the complainant<\/p>\n
sustained injury to the right wrist. ‘When he cried, the accused<\/p>\n
\u00a33 CILRP SIOEZGG6<\/p>\n
has sought for settirxg aside the conviction by
\nrevision. Per contra, the learned High
\nPleacier supports the impugned judgment  V’ ‘ ‘<\/p>\n
Courts below.\n<\/p>\n
6. I have gone  evide:11ee_”‘_=  the
\nprosecution and also the \ufb01i:1″thev\u00a7evidenee.<\/p>\n
\nAs could be seen from the    incident took\nplace on     p.m. when the\n  011 the katta of the\ntemple    aA't*abeut 9.30 p.m., when they\n<\/pre>\n
were S\u00a3ilEI~_f.1i\u20act’e;  the accused at once started<\/p>\n
abusing the  a.%.\u00a7’t'”Soole Magane” and that he talks<\/p>\n
 u  miueh  hie when the complainant explained the<\/p>\n
 as ‘*i;z>’WI:l3I,_ he has to talk with his Wife i.e., as she was<\/p>\n
tile the Grama ?a11chayath and the Member of<\/p>\n
‘V the Fapeeaf\ufb01th, the accused at once made an attempt to<\/p>\n
 ” “ggssaugt the injured with the eeissor which he had brought on<\/p>\n
tiavettelzjzest and whibe he made his efforts to escape, PW.}.<\/p>\n
” \u00e9ijtstained the injuxy to his right wrist and on the second<\/p>\n
: attempt of assauit by the accused, the ?.W.1 sustained injury<\/p>\n
on the abdomen and at that time, it is PWs.2 and 3 who came<\/p>\n
8 CILRP St\ufb01i\ufb01\ufb02\ufb02\ufb01
\nrecorded the complaint Ex.P.1 which came to be registered in<\/p>\n
Crime No.36\/2003 and the complaint Ex.P.1 and the FIR were
\nsent to the Magstrate. Though there is some delay  the<\/p>\n
registra\ufb01on of the complaint and the receipt of <\/p>\n
by the Magistrate, in View of the fact that the    <\/p>\n
reveals the name of the accused, the”\ufb01in’c2   ‘that <\/p>\n
was admitted in the hospital Within     ‘the<\/p>\n
overruies the possibiiity of tiie  tat”?<\/p>\n
disaeivantage by the Police the crime<\/p>\n
against the accused.\n<\/p>\n
7′. V:i?W’.1′  ;eVidence as to Why the accused<\/p>\n
made the   assault and he sates that in the<\/p>\n
 _ \u00e9\ufb01rst.\u00bb whee’ ‘–.tt1e____&a.ccused assaulted on the chest, he<\/p>\n
   the injuxy to the right wrist and Ex, 13.3<\/p>\n
rexrei\ufb01lst injury on the right wrist. In the second<\/p>\n
V .attexti’pt  ” the accused, though PWJ tried to escaye,<\/p>\n
 on the abdomen and injury No.1 pertaxn” s to<\/p>\n
  the medieai evidence is consistent with the ocuiar<\/p>\n
T  ” eevieience of PW’. 3, t0 3. Furthermore, P’Ws.2 and 3 Weze present<\/p>\n
” at the time of the incident cf assault by the accused and they<\/p>\n
consistently state about the accused aseaulting the<\/p>\n
19 Cri.RP 81012006
\nseized the seisscx” M(L).1. The perusal of Ex.P.’.2 reveals that the<\/p>\n
scissor was measuring 9 inches in length and 2 inches in width
\nwith a sharp blade. So taking into consideration the fact that it
\nis a sharp edged Weapon, it Could be held that it is a daiigemus<\/p>\n
weapon. The mere fact that it was used. by  :\u00a71S <\/p>\n
instzmment for cut\ufb01ng the clothes itself is not a   V’ <\/p>\n
that it is not a dangemus weapon.\n<\/p>\n
10. So far as the injury is -eenceineii, it  v<\/p>\n
of the learned counsel that the was  hefspital for a<\/p>\n
day ancfhe    and therefom, he claims
\nthat the’riz.1js1y  is not a gievous injury. On<\/p>\n
this aspecut’ eczf\u00e9 \ufb02’_1.\u20ac I..”‘l\u20acViA’\u00a3?_.\u00a71:I’,\u00ab the provisions of Section 320 [PC<\/p>\n
 A’   uamqngst the kinds of the hurts mentioned in<\/p>\n
 ‘3e\u20ac:’tiO\ufb01–v32Q’_it is sfated as:\n<\/p>\n
  — Am: hurt which endangers iife or which<\/p>\n
 ea’izses Vthe \u00bbsu\ufb02’erer to he duzing the space of twenty days<\/p>\n
V ” ieisevere bodily pain or unable to foiimv his oztizn” my<\/p>\n
” : pursuits”,<\/p>\n
1 LA?\u00bb conic! be seen \ufb01vm the nature 0f injury it
\nendangers the life and hence is a grievous injury as provided<\/p>\n
under Section 320 WC. If since, it is established that the hurt<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
V 326 “I\u00a7;’C’.\n<\/p>\n
11 Cti.RP 8IE)!2G06
\nendangers the life of an individual, it is not necessary ‘shot such<\/p>\n
a person shouid be treated in the hospital for  so<\/p>\n
as to call it grievous injuxy under Section 320 I. 4′ <\/p>\n
suffered the injmy on the a\u00a5adon1e3:;.MfI’}’:1e   <\/p>\n
the abdomen and thereafter causecta the<\/p>\n
intestine. The contents were coining out ‘aa1;;d “there was <\/p>\n
treatment to the injured at the  he coixlctiilhtave\ufb01eollapsed.
\nIn my coxisiderezi view,  PW. 1 falls Within
\nthe category of the inju1iesv:”met1\ufb01o.t1e<'iA"\u00a7,o'See\ufb01on 320 IPC. So<\/p>\n
the Weapon ueecigis ei3–.da1igerou:_\u00a7"'ivea;3on and the injuxy<\/p>\n
su\ufb01'e1ed:__is ._g1"-*ievo12';e_\u00bb Vii1jTii1*y 'and -therefore, in my opinion, the<\/p>\n
o\ufb01ence   of the provisions under Section<\/p>\n
V  "be'~\u00a7roseeu\ufb01on examined PWs.4 and '? the persons<\/p>\n
wiioiiook  to the hospitai. PW.6 is the Doctor who<\/p>\n
Kftssuettl .. Vixxjnzy certi\ufb01cate. PWZ9 is the constabie who<\/p>\n
 "..fa;5pre};entied the accused and produced him before the 138%.<\/p>\n
.  is the Head constable who recorded the complaint and<\/p>\n
" ettbmitted the same to PW.11 the investigating O\ufb01icer who<\/p>\n
registered the complaint am held the investigation. So<\/p>\n
considering the material placeei on record, I am of the<\/p>\n
54<\/span><\/p>\n
E2 Cl’i.R? 8I\u20ac}i20{}6
\nconsidered opinion that the Couxts below were justified in<\/p>\n
convicting the peti\ufb01oner for the offence under Section 326 IPC
\nand also under Section 506 (2) of IPC as there was a threat of<\/p>\n
danger to the life of the complainant and therefore,  not<\/p>\n
\ufb01nd any justi\ufb01able grounds to warrant the <\/p>\n
as the conviction of the petitioner for the aboj.fe”~$ai:I’T\u00a3”on\ufb01i\u00a7IicesA V’ <\/p>\n
are conceme\u00e9.\n<\/p>\n
E3. So far as the sentenceis concerned,Tjt’i$’vco1;fcx:1tion. V ”<\/p>\n
of the learned counsei that  w.a”s~ ioivnyooiog person<\/p>\n
aged abb\ufb01\u00e9 ssiivfoyegi\u00e9g aiftiic   o\u00a3 the incident. He had
\nentertaiI\u00a7eci”<io1ib–tVVa?oou'tTi  being the person who talks<\/p>\n
with his Wife\ufb01oow  fheiffor some dubious reasons and it is<\/p>\n
  ;\u00bb_cV:izc;1mst$ii:1c~e:-xthat the incident has taken place. He<\/p>\n
 jfthere was no taik between the injured and his<\/p>\n
wife, "there  no necessity for the accused to cause any<\/p>\n
',;assau'}"\u00a3. Zisvrelevant to note that the petitioner was aged about<\/p>\n
A   at the time of the incident an\u00e9 even prior to the<\/p>\n
'  iotgieleot, they were sitting together taiking for 25 minutes and<\/p>\n
"  is thezeafter that the accused started abusing the<\/p>\n
complaizxant and caused assault with the scissor. So taking<\/p>\n
into consideration the age of the accused and the fact that his<\/p>\n
54<\/span><\/p>\n
13 Crl.R\u00a7’ 8EGf20{)6<\/p>\n
wife has 1:0 be looked after by him and ifhe is continucci~.<;fi1.._thc<\/p>\n
custody for a lcmgcf time, his family may be i"<\/p>\n
think that tile sentence of two year$\u00bbVcrdcIt;ti"'f<–;w.:}*_V.t:1icV: c;a\ufb02Q'e:i'ce= <\/p>\n
under Section 326 {PC is on the hig\ufb01cr sidz\u00e9; the<\/p>\n
matter, I answer Point No.1 psirtlgg in  \u00e91$5i1'r1a1:i'::\u00e9 i1_1 *.<\/p>\n
negative: and proceed to pass tI:evL4ftJ;Lbavjng:"  V<\/p>\n
The      the conviction for
\nthe offence   (2) IPC. The sentence
\n (the accused) is ordered
\nto undecgo for a period of one year and to<\/p>\n
pay the \ufb01nc a3._ o1'dcrtE<:I'- "the Trial Court and $0 also for the<\/p>\n
 V'  Jg\ufb01e\ufb01\u00e9e :,_i;\u00a71d'z:1f  506(2) IPC, he is oreicmd to undergo<\/p>\n
   for a period of one year. Both the<\/p>\n
 concmmntly. The bail bonds of the pctzitioner<\/p>\n
 '~.~.. \\,(ae::<:ust;i)1stands cancelled. The Trial Sourt is directed in<\/p>\n
 thc pmsence of the accused to undergo the sentence.<\/p>\n
:%;d\/-\n<\/p>\n
]UDGE<\/p>\n
TL.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009 Author: A.S.Pachhapure 1 CARP 8i\u20ac}!.’Z906 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT’I3i%N{\u00a73\u00a7\u00a30I!\u00a7.E–IA 4_ DATED THIS THE 0613 \u00a7_3,A.Y_OF IIIJLY\u00ab?2\u00a7Ira13.3anya Bhat, HCGP.) I ” ‘ Criminal Revision Pe\ufb01tion is fikcd under Scc\ufb01on 40}. j ‘C12 to set aside the judgment of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-178991","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nTailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-07-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-15T02:57:01+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-15T02:57:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1390,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009\",\"name\":\"Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-15T02:57:01+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-15T02:57:01+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-15T02:57:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009"},"wordCount":1390,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009","name":"Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-15T02:57:01+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tailor-rajappa-vs-state-of-karnataka-by-channagiri-on-6-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Tailor Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka By Channagiri on 6 July, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178991","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=178991"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178991\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=178991"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=178991"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=178991"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}