{"id":180789,"date":"2009-07-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009"},"modified":"2016-09-27T14:44:24","modified_gmt":"2016-09-27T09:14:24","slug":"the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"The State By P S I Hukkeri Police … vs Tayavva D\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
The State By P S I Hukkeri Police … vs Tayavva D\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 July, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Jawad Rahim<\/div>\n
IN ma men eou\u00e9r or KARHATAKA\n\ncmcurr BENCH A1' nmnwm S  ~ A'\n\nDATED THIS mg 7\" mm or     \n\nwrong'  4\nTHE aoxrnm MR. Jusrmm  \ncnmnm.   \nwwmmv: V' V M A\n1. THE swrra  _   _ \nBY P SI HUKKERI POLICvE'SFA\u00a5I'_I()I~\u00a7, \n.   -  'V * nrmnmm\n(BY SR1, 12-;\u00ab.1{1 ; .c;o:1*KmIsiD1, ~H(_1'_\u00bbS;f?) \n\n1' TA'&'..AVV\"A    _  \u00ab\nI3\/0 sg1v.BH\u00a7-MAPPA-~KEsARUR\n; 389 CRC}$S,' 'GOKAK FALLS\n~  Maw' AT CHA.\ufb01I.iZ).URA VELLA\nTQA. HEEKKERI, EDIST. BELGAUM\n\"      ..  nmpomamrr\n'{By\u00ab..$\ufb01.;T-Q73 KANNUI? 65 S MAHESH)\n\n'c;\u00a7'L.A. 911.39 U\/S.3'?8(1} & (3) cmac: BY THE STATE\n\nV. P'. ma THE $'I'A'I'E PRAYING THAT mxs HOIWBLE comm\n\n'  MA? BE PLEASED TO GRANT LEAVE TO FILE AN APPEAL\n    AGAINS'I' TEE JUDGEMENT m'.25.7.2003 PASSED BY THE\n' V\u00bb ...-JMF'C., HUKKER1, IN C.C.NO.369\/01 -- ACQUITTING THE\n\nRESPONDEKT\/ACCUSED FOR THE} OFFENSE PIE}\/3.420,\n465, 466, 468, 471, 201 R\/W SEC. 34 OF IPC.\n\ngall\n\n\n\nTHIS APPEAL comma on FOR FINAL s-:*.;:\u00a7;\u00e9;:2;'p:%c; \n\nBAY, THE COURT DELIVEREB THE FOLLO\u00a7\u00a7f\u00a7N(}: V  %\n\nJUnGm\u00a3;g\ufb01 \n\nThe State is in   \u00e9ated V'\n\n25.012003 in cc No.359\/ 209-I\"o:.zi !Ii\u20ac 31\u00a2 ofJM:?c; Hukkeri\n\nacquitting the 1espofid\u00e9;;;t   for offences\n\npunishable unc;,;-gr secnfm:'42\u00a3>, _4(.'6,\u00ab~f\u00a2\"53, 471, 201 R\/W\n\nSec. 34 of    ' ' I AV\n2.\"     P. Gotkhjndi, learned Govt.\n\nP1eadcf :?'o1'9 the  the records. It reveals:\n\n; 'One  Talawar lodged report before\n\n.' V.  'Afh\u00e9  on 29.01.1999 alleging that the\n\n L,_.\ufb01i~sgt'v:\"t:$\u00a7\ufb01\u00abc\u00a7j;:tiv\u00e9\u00e91z,t:'5\u00a7'ayasrva 1)} o. Bhimappa Kesamr had forged\n\ncfzif\ufb01in Cef\ufb01iiltgatcs for sccuxing employment in the Social\n\n\"'..,WeIfa1t,\u00a7&::part\u00a3nent of the Government He alleged, she was\n\n\"ii having not studied in any school and was confined\n\n   domestic fife. He lmcw her and her family vczy W'8}I and\n\nu was thus acquaizitezi with her life. Though $116 was illiterate,\n\nshe connive\u00e9 with a retired Head mastczr of Government\n\n{\/\n\n\n\nKannada Girls Primary School at Koujalagi to \n\ncertain' ccrtz\ufb01ca' ms to Shaw she had studied    \n\nThe complaint so submittzd .:wz:s:_ \u00bb' th\u00a2_: '\n\njtxxisdictsional mag1'strate and nei%*nwed[,  \"   ti_1 e: \n\ninvcs\ufb01ga\ufb01on who \ufb01led cha1~Vg\u00bbe_V:L\u00a7\u00a31cet.  1\u00b0' . L'\n\nrespondent\/1*' accused. ~-- Tayav\ufb01a.   <?;1tj'\u00a2, bvangawa<\/pre>\n
(2nd respondent] 211′   for the ch\ufb01rgcs
\nmferrtd abovtt .\n<\/p>\n
3.    –\u00ab Gangawa died and
\n  was subjected to
\ntrial,  examined 11 Witnesses
\nand  \u00a7;iocuments. The accused put up<\/p>\n
\ufb01yx\ufb01dcf\u00e9ince of  simplicitor and also questioned veracity<\/p>\n
.A jcaf   \ufb01tatcment given by Yaznanappa Basapm<\/p>\n
  examined as PW2. She also<\/p>\n
qiias\ufb01\u00a33\ufb01cd:”‘i\u20acBabi\ufb01ty of Exs.P4, P5, P6, F’? and P9.<\/p>\n
4. The leamxzd Trial Judge accepted the contentions of<\/p>\n
Vfthc 1″ accused that there was no clinching proof 1:9 establish<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
V<\/p>\n
the charge for the o\ufb01ences indicated above and <\/p>\n
1\u00b0’ accused, against which the State is in appe;-;1.- ‘   ‘ <\/p>\n
5. The learned Government <\/p>\n
prosecution has S1lCC6SSfL111}7’3.%S’\ufb01?\u00a7?)]iS}”1Cdg’L11$it ?1:ieA._1es_p9;’2Lden$_:t I<\/p>\n
had studied only up  23″ uGo\u00a7\u00a54E:nt11_1:iet:tvvf\u00a7Kannada
\nGrits Primaxy Schoolv    :5 “by PWS ..
\nMahalingappa Shivapena\ufb01ga —“VHe also xefermd
\nto Exs.P10    had studied at
\nhis  in  ‘  left. He relies on
\nEx. —  _  produced by the 1”\n<\/p>\n
accusee;   Welfare Department. With<\/p>\n
referenee   it is urged that 1*’ accused had<\/p>\n
. V.  epixeiueed  that she had completed 7*” std. to<\/p>\n
  4vV’e3:;f;:fp}oyment, whexeas it is shown that she has<\/p>\n
‘mm?  Gmemment Kannada Girls Primary School at<\/p>\n
 Kaujaleugi. In fact in Ex.P7, the reference is ‘made to the<\/p>\n
 w$\u00a71:iZ?iSSi\u20ac)f1 register skewing that entry S1.No.238 rekates to a<\/p>\n
 \u00a7g’r1 calied Shilpa and not the 1″ accused — Tayawa. He<\/p>\n
submits that EXP’? has been issued on the basis of entries<\/p>\n
in the admission regster found at Si.No.238. Ex.P’7 was a<\/p>\n
\u00a7_\/{L<\/p>\n
concoctcd document. Since the signature of  <\/p>\n
Gangawa is found, the pmsecu\ufb01qp has  tI:1at_it”. <\/p>\n
was a forged document for thizu  <\/p>\n
employment. He submits tilaf the”    ><\/p>\n
incsriminating evidence and   to the
\nother documents   studied at
\nGovernment Kannada  at Gokak. He
\nsubmits 8131; -if   it shows she
\nhad   was not quali\ufb01ed to meet
\nthe basic    employment at Social
\n   gtmnd, he seeks reversai of<\/p>\n
the: judgxfienf of  <\/p>\n
V”  f\u00a7Ft:”‘r1′]Ei\\’?”_I’CS})(\u00a3}.&f’3IIt\/ accusezd has been no\ufb01\ufb01sed and is<\/p>\n
 -._  Vibday.\n<\/p>\n
  is an appeal against the acquittal Necessarily<\/p>\n
V.   ap\ufb01liant will have to establish the gonads convincingly<\/p>\n
”    reversal of the \ufb01ndings recorded by the Trial Court.<\/p>\n
\u00a394<\/p>\n
8. The learned Trial Judge has; mam\ufb01edv’ .4 V <\/p>\n
order that the prosecu\ufb01on was  t*I?_. A’<\/p>\n
establish that the 1′” actctzeedj 13′?” A.\u00a7ee\u00a7)oncieuiz\u00a7:    L.<\/p>\n
ftutherance of her common  wi\ufb01i  No.2
\nGangavva (since    by
\nforgery at a place nea;f._  the said
\nwmmam    Social Welfaxe
\nDepartmentieg}   Trial Judge has
\nrxoticedzj  =  Talawar, the
\ncomplaieaet   the investigation commenced<\/p>\n
was _be1atee{”  V.1;1 A though the respondent was<\/p>\n
  the the complaint came to be \ufb01bd<\/p>\n
  Since the deiay in \ufb01ling the xeport was<\/p>\n
  the complaint and also Em the evidenoe, the<\/p>\n
  Judge held it was fatal to the pmsecutien.<\/p>\n
     Secondly, the learned Trial Judge neiiceti that PVJ2<\/p>\n
 the complainant in his report had not named the 2″‘<\/p>\n
VV accused, but had merely men\ufb01oned that 1\u00b0’ accused hm<\/p>\n
conntisved with retired Head master of Government Kannada<\/p>\n
Giris Primary School at Koujalagl In the evidence, for the<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
\ufb01rs! time, he tried to improve earlier veI_fsi’u1\u00e9{<\/p>\n
accusation against the 2″” accused. The    <\/p>\n
has also noticed that the  <\/p>\n
that the 13* accused was” >i1I_itera<1ie–A  ws\ufb01 <\/p>\n
domestic life and not seen the-. at.  the V<\/p>\n
prosecu\ufb01on itself has  to show
\nthat the 1*' accused    up to 21" std.
\nat Govemmept   at Koujalagi.\n<\/p>\n
The pro$gee1’\u00a7j;igifA1v’    – Smt. Neelawwa
\n _ and PW5 — Mahalingappa
\n spoken about the studies of<\/p>\n
1′ .-leeused    and had produced documents in<\/p>\n
 – V\u00e9\ufb01gch steiement That evidence was pzvdeced by<\/p>\n
    and was against the charge.\n<\/p>\n
 z  .’ Lfhe learned Trial Jucige hekl that the &st<\/p>\n
 ., a\ufb01ega\ufb01ens that the rcspcmdent was \ufb02literate shall fai} as it<\/p>\n
=:–=V\u00a7es .\u20ac3h0xxrn that she had studied up to 2″” std. He proceeded<\/p>\n
 “en the premise that she was educated. The next chmge<\/p>\n
raised by the prosecution was that she was not quali\ufb01ed to<\/p>\n
be appointed as cook in Socia}. Welfame Department, but on<\/p>\n
2.4;,<\/p>\n
if<\/p>\n
8 V.\n<\/p>\n
misrepresentation that she was educated  sh?<\/p>\n
secured employment also was negated by    <\/p>\n
Judge on the basis that than-: wasizi\u00e9  A um  ‘ ;,\u00e9ti\u00a3>i1<\/p>\n
pniscribcd to appoint a perscn as   <\/p>\n
Eepaxtment as in the year   <\/p>\n
has held the pmsecutio:-1″ prove  date of
\nappointment of the 1;’  as  in the Social<\/p>\n
Wclfam Departs \u00e9 fem,    “jsosscss 1111mm’ ‘ um<\/p>\n
vV.Gf–.thaVv;’ ‘1} g’ 73* standard. The
\nlcaxntfd.   v ‘VV’13..q:’.i’tr\u00a3s:__i:(‘i from the over atta-m’ 11:’ g
\n  rsijzoxds that as in the year 1999, the<\/p>\n
daps\ufb01\ufb01nant  4’41 std. as the basic eligibility for<\/p>\n
.A  not either 531 3111. at 7″‘ sm. Since the<\/p>\n
  71:’:a;1 faiicd to product noti\ufb01cation of the<\/p>\n
\u20ac}<j%'w:1:3::;t:x1.e1:1i' prescribing minimum educational standax\u00e9 fer<\/p>\n
   sash spiaoinhncnt, he held that the chargcz that he has<\/p>\n
A'  ;i11"si\u00a3:pmsented or being quali\ufb01ed was fake.<\/p>\n
11. The icamcd Trial Judge also nomad that the
\nmain acquisition against the accused to sustain charge for<\/p>\n
offences under Section 420,  , 468 was that she had<\/p>\n
9<\/span>
\nforged and produced Ex.P’7 before the Social S\ufb01feifare<\/p>\n
Department ice secure job. But the gmsecution <\/p>\n
EXP? from the said depaxtment omcers. The   <\/p>\n
was produced by PW8 – K. B.  0   i ‘V .\n<\/p>\n
how he came to be in poseessien cf e the’<\/p>\n
Consequently, it is held thateV’i’-here ‘zap    ><\/p>\n
was in fact submitted by the i” eccused to
\nthe Social Welfaxe  H such an
\nemployment. ‘I’o reaee1_;1gee.,V   Judge has<\/p>\n
veri\ufb01ed’  e\\’?i\u00a7c\u00a7\u00a7enee~.’ivhic3;i_”V’siie\u00a7gvs that EX.P7 was not
\nfound ‘_i’n’.’_ the  E)epart1ne:n.t when the<\/p>\n
inves\ufb01gafing\u00e9  Vieited and none of the witnesses spake<\/p>\n
 V.   euhmiited by the 1*” accused.\n<\/p>\n
  _ 1.9.”   fact situation, the learned Trial Judge<\/p>\n
 V’3\u00a7”\u00a7}:_ee3accusation in: the complaint remained only as<\/p>\n
 ailegatieae and had not transformed into Eegal evidence to<\/p>\n
‘V  13* accused fer o\ufb01enoe punishable under Sections<\/p>\n
M 465, 466, 468 of IPC. M<\/p>\n
13. The learned Government Pleader is <\/p>\n
point out to any circumstances against the  <\/p>\n
by the iearned Sessions Judge to  u<\/p>\n
had conducted its investigation  ex” <\/p>\n
evidence placed before the    the . L’<\/p>\n
charges. in the cixeuxgnstancesgfiztxkaee  that the
\nreasoning assigned by “i’:jza1:”;E11dge were against<\/p>\n
the material ev;de11cev.e:; . :1feco3jdg_dr”v_th\u00e9tv” the evidence on<\/p>\n
moon}  1 the Eearhed Judge has
\nfailffd  <:'3\u20ac\u00a5I1VSi(1\u00a2V'f\u00ab;I':.V:\u00bbi'i_1<h}I'T'1II1I1"  aspects in the evidence and<\/p>\n
zeached ceilclusien, t'_1eV1\u00a3-"is no reason to interfere with such<\/p>\n
   also be netieed that the o\ufb01icers ef the<\/p>\n
  Department had no yievahee against the<\/p>\n
 naecuee:3.A.:' Ne o\ufb01eial at any level in the deparment found the<\/p>\n
 \u00e9ieeiimeeg if any submitted by 1" accused either forged,<\/p>\n
    or net genuine. It is only PW2 —- Yamanappa<\/p>\n
Basappa Talwar claiming to be Social Worker lodged
\ncomplaint against 15* accused. Obviotlsly, he claimed to be<\/p>\n
one who had \ufb01rst had information of the alleged forgery. '\u00a7'he<\/p>\n
gel';\/\u00bb<\/p>\n
El<\/p>\n
question is Why he kept quit: for 1 E yea:r\u00a7':" \u00e9:if;p<$4$cT't}i\u00a7:  <\/p>\n
respondent. Undoubtedly, it is  <\/p>\n
ccmspired action against the 1"  ;f?'\u00a7S\ufb01}Q#1\u20ac1\ufb01I1.t!g'_" T}1t'3 <\/p>\n
'F1131' Judge ugh' \ufb02y has noticcsi  rr\u00b0co'.,   <\/p>\n
amrm the same. The a9pca1&.21asA.i 1o  x\u00e9itid"is"'1;ejected.<\/p>\n
Accordillglys the agg\ufb01gal   =
\nSd\/-\n<\/p>\n
IUDG E<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court The State By P S I Hukkeri Police … vs Tayavva D\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 July, 2009 Author: Jawad Rahim IN ma men eou\u00e9r or KARHATAKA cmcurr BENCH A1′ nmnwm S ~ A’ DATED THIS mg 7″ mm or wrong’ 4 THE aoxrnm MR. Jusrmm cnmnm. wwmmv: V’ V M […]<\/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-180789","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe State By P S I Hukkeri Police ... vs Tayavva D\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 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\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The State By P S I Hukkeri Police ... vs Tayavva D\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-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=\"2009-07-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-27T09:14:24+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\\\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The State By P S I Hukkeri Police … vs Tayavva D\\\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-27T09:14:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1269,\"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\\\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009\",\"name\":\"The State By P S I Hukkeri Police ... vs Tayavva D\\\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-27T09:14:24+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The State By P S I Hukkeri Police … vs Tayavva D\\\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 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":"The State By P S I Hukkeri Police ... vs Tayavva D\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 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\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The State By P S I Hukkeri Police ... vs Tayavva D\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-27T09:14:24+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\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The State By P S I Hukkeri Police … vs Tayavva D\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-27T09:14:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009"},"wordCount":1269,"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\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009","name":"The State By P S I Hukkeri Police ... vs Tayavva D\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-27T09:14:24+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-by-p-s-i-hukkeri-police-vs-tayavva-do-sri-bhimappa-kesarur-on-7-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The State By P S I Hukkeri Police … vs Tayavva D\/O Sri Bhimappa Kesarur on 7 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\/180789","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=180789"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/180789\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=180789"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=180789"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=180789"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}