{"id":187400,"date":"2010-02-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010"},"modified":"2016-06-19T01:42:35","modified_gmt":"2016-06-18T20:12:35","slug":"sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: K.N.Keshavanarayana<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2aj1oIfj--.O: -..\n\nBEFORE  V  O. \nTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K N   \" \"\nCRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1430  2007'  \"   I '\n\nBETWEEN:\n\n1. SR1. B.T. NARASIMHA REDDY,\n\nAGED ABOUT 70 YEARS\"    \n\ns\/O. LATE BANDALU 'ITI*IIP?AI'%JIf'x137II;'\nAGRICULTURIST 138% PROFESSIOIJ, '  _\nBURUJUNARAPPA POS_T,','\" ' '  1 \nHIRIYUR TALUK,  'O  \"  I  I\nCHITRADUPQA D}'__ST:RIf3T;~ % I  V. \n\n2. SR1. B.N'. SURESE-IA,  \n\nAGED'_ABQUTA\u00a53.3VV  \u00ab V\ns \/0. BLT; Ir\u00abam \"RI-EDDY\nAGPEICULTURIST 'I3.Y\"P_ROFEssION,\nBURtrJUNAR.Ap:%A_ PQST, \nHIRIYUR TALUK, \" ; = _ \nCHITRADURGADISTRICT.\n\n \"   ....APPELLANTS\n\n   NAGESI-I, SENIOR COUNSEL)\n\n........._......m. .\n\n I V::HE S'I\u00a7'\\TEV:Ofv\"'I{ARNATAKA\n_  .B':{_'i'HB3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,\n I ,AiMANGA\u00a3A TALUK,\n\n .CE%I_3'TRA13URGA DISTRICT.  RESPONDENT\n\n\"  ._(BY SR1 B. BALAKRISI-INA. HCGP )\n\n BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPEZLLANTS AGAINST THE\n\nTHIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U\/S. 374 CR.P.C\n\n \n\n\n\n6] After hearing both sides and on assevssdnient\n\nof the oral and documentary evidence, \n\nSessions Judge by the judgment under appeal:   \n\nthe prosecution has failed to prdye lcharges d1ei{e_11e.d'AS\n\nagainst Accused No.3 :Mothe\u00abr\u00a7in--V1--aw'V'of  '..de.cea_sedd, \n\ntherefore, acquitted her of  d\ufb01hevfiiearned\nSessions Judge further.V:'h.e1d.g. \"'--the>\"prosecution has\nproved beyond*-- all  tithe guiit of\nAccused-    under Section 4\nof the   No.1 for offences\npunishagble'  \u00ab\u00a7l98-A and 304~B of IPC,\n\naccordingvly,idconiricted\" Accused Nos. 1 81 2 for those\n\n offeI'ices_;' 'hearing Accused-- 1 & 2 regarding\n\n 'seni:enc_e,Vtgh.e\"learned Sessions Judge passed the order\n\nregarding'Sfseiitence. Being aggrieved by the said\n\njudgment of conviction and order of sentence, Accused\n\nA \"rigid  have presented this appeal.\n\n'7) I have heard Sri. C.V. Nagesh, learned Senior\n\nCounsel appearing for the appellant and Sri. B.\n\n\n\n11\n\nlearned Sessions Judge has committed S\u20acI'iOL1S error in\nholding that Accused No.1 is guiity of the offence\n\npunishable under Section 30443 of IPC. It is hisvfiirtlier\n\nsubmission that there has been inordinate'rdela~j,\u00e9:__;i;1__\"' _\n\nlodging the complaint, which has not been\"   \" 'V\n\nsuch, the whole case of the prose'cuti_jon--'is '1*equired:to\u00abb@:_'\n\nviewed with suspicion. Accor,ding\"~to ,lea.ifne\u00a73\u00ab--v...Se--nior -. \"\n\nCounsel, even in the;__belated___Vc'oInplaint  as per\n\nEXPIQ, there was abs'olutelly_  a'liegat*ion against any\n\nof the accused'_de_rnar1dingg\u00a7either_incash or in kind or\n\nwith :g?elgafd\":l.ft0  tht':..\"vwaccused subjecting the\ndeceased to c1'uellty.lf'l'*~i_rl\"'\u00abc~onnection with dowiy soon\n\nbeforcthe  of the deceased. as such, the necessary\n\n.  of Section 304~B IPC a.re not proved or\n\n  is his further submission that. the\n\nleai*\u00abned.__\"Seslsions Judge having acquitted Accused-- I 8:\n\n  'for 'offence punishable under Sections- 3 and 6 of the\n\n_'  Act, has committed serious error in convicting\n\n  \"-A:ccused~ l 8: 2 for offence punishable under Section-- 4\n\nof the I).P.Act, though there is absolutely no evidence\n\n\n\n12\nplaced by the prosecution to establish that the Accused\n\nhad made demands for dowry either before or after the\n\nmarriage. It is his further submission that the \n\nevidence of the parents and other \n\ndeceased with regard to the alleged  andxl\"  \n\nacceptance of the dowry and also  \n\nsubjecting the deceased to.\u00bbcrueltyl'ian'd ha.rassrn_en_t\u00a7 is\nhighly inconsistent, discrepaIit\"._ai1d full \ufb01gfi omissions\nand improvements,  such, ;riol\"'relli:\u00e9u1ce could have\n\nbeen placed on the evi\u00a2ei1ce\"of\"-thi;\u00a7slell'witn;esses. It is his\n\nfurther subrriis-_sioria4 lthlatf even if the evidence of the\nwitnessesay who' .arelf'closerelatives of the accused are\n\naccepted, would' not indicate that the alleged cruelty\n\nl'o;jhlaifaslsnien_t was for or in relation to the dowry and\n\nI   their evidence, such alleged cruelty or\n\nV V' _ hara\u00abssrI.ieiit\u00ab:lwas on account of the failure on the part of\n\n .l'.the,i_.dec'eased to do household works and therefore,\n\n  lii'igre'dients of Section 304-8 IPC are not attracted. It is\n\nT  'the further submission of the learned Senior Counsel\n\nit that, with regard to the alleged marriage talks prior to\n\n5'2\n\n\n\n13%\n\nthe marriage, except examining the close relatives of the\n\ndeceased, no other independent witnesse4sr.V_:\"~..who\n\naccording to the parents of the deceased   .\n\nthe time of the marriage talks, have._beeri\"ex\ufb01i.ned'_'  ii\"\n\nnon--examination of any of those n\u00a7_ateriai~.witriessiesaivs:\n\nsu\ufb01icient to draw adve1's_e'~..'A>tVE>-]'.'er\u20ac\" ll-is \n\n4'\n\nSection 302 of EPC alleging  thga1':;_the \n\nthe deceased was homicidalarld thepartieiularaccused\n\nwas responsible for  question\nof framing charge forV_offericeltiins:ler'n--Seetion 306 of IPC\n\nalleging  deleeased haijsefcc-rninitted suicide and\n\nthe ;Vacc1,isefl_  abetted. the commission of such\nsuicidegg 'dgoe:-3._n@jt'.ari.se;\u00ab in addition to this, even the\n\ncharge frla1nVeC'td7'forV- offence under Section 306 r\/W.\n\n  34-.g_of  not an alternative charge. This\n\n    the leaamed Sessions Judge has not\n\npriopetlyi-.i'\u00aba1A)plied his mind at the time of framing\n\n12) Reading the contents of the charge framed\n\n the learned Sessions Judge indicate that there is\n\ngreat force in the argument of the learned Senior\n\n \n \n\n\n\n20\n\nCounsel that the charges are vague and it-=___lacks\n\nparticulars as required by Sections 211 gof\n\nCr.P.C. At this stage, it is necessary  \n\ncharges framed by the learned; lmSes_'~:-ions \nread as under:--\n\n\"That you 'accused'  f\ufb01arfied\ndeceased Shobha on on\n2.12.2005 co1r1na1it.ted  deceased\nShobha in   1.30 p.rn.,\nthereby'   \"offence punishable\nunder1:_SeC'ti'on  \"I\u00a7\"C.-,2 and within my\n\nVy,cogn'izance,_  ~ 2'\n\n  =  Nos. 1 to 3 demanded\n\n0 _ dowry Vfrornr parerits of deceased Shobha at the\n Etirne \u00abmarriage i.e., on 4.5.2005 i.e.,\n_ i,f0o.ooo\/W and 15 toias of gold in which\n -- each was paid to accused No.2\n CW2 and 13 tolas of gold, thereby\n\n~ you have committed an offence punishable\n\n00  under Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the 13.13'. Act r\/W.\n\n2 Section 34 of IPC, and within my cognizance.\n\nThat you accused -~1 to 3 in prosecution\n\nof your common intention iI1--treated deceased\n\n\n\n\n\nShobha for one or the other reason on the\npretext of demand of dowry and caused bodiiy\nand mentally pain, and thereby committed an\noffence punishable under Section 498--A \n\nSection 34 of IPC and within my cogni.'\"\/;_ar_1_\"(4;-_e',:\"'* S.  ~\n\nThat you A1 to A3 in prosecutionof  it\ncommon intention ill\u00abtreat;-:d\"dece_a'sedV.Sdhoiohail \non the pretext of demand of  7.'\nher death i.e., 2 to}as\u00ab.___of  \nhave committed an offence punishabie under\nSection 304-8 fr\/Kw. .Secti.o:n\ufb01\"'3\u00a7L of SIPC\" and\n\nwithin my cognizance.\"   \n\n'--  accused in prosecution\nof   abetted the cause of\n\nis ' death it of Adeceasedz' Shobha, thereby committed\n  offence' 'punishable under Section 306 1'\/'W.\nit \"  _'34 of IPC, and Within my cognizance. \"\n\n 13')h.\".\"g:..Se.ctioz:1 211 of Cr.P.C. deals with the\n\n conitents 'the charge. According to Sub--section (1) of\n\n  $ection.\"'21 1, every charge under this Code should state\n\n\"offence with which the accused is charged. Sub--\n\n\"section (2) states that. if the law which creates the\n\n\n\n22\n\noffence gives it ay speci\ufb01c name, the offence may be\n\ndescribed in the charge by that name only. to\n\nsub--section (4), the law and section of  \n\nwhich the offence is said to:-ihave been\n\nshould also be mentioned in the'chta(r\u00a7e. it\n\n14) Section 212  as to'\n\ntime, place and person'. Aeic'oI*din.,\u00a7'to sub4'sec'tion {1} of\nthis section, the  contaixn.Vlls'_ach particulars\nas to the timeaifi-d of  offence and the\n\nperson. if  the thing. if any, in\n\nrespect of whicjhyp\u00e9liit  committed. as or reasonably\n\nsu\ufb02icienlttlto  llthevafscused notice of the matter for\n\n .     \n<\/pre>\n
15} _l  the case on hand, the charges framed by<\/p>\n
 the .lear’neciVAl.S~e’ssions Judge which are extracted above.<\/p>\n
lack tl_iese:”lparticulars, viz., the charges do not specify<\/p>\n
  athe place at which the alleged offence is committed and<\/p>\n
 the person or persons by whom the offence is<\/p>\n
it “committed, more so, in relation to the charge under<\/p>\n
K2<\/p>\n
 .occ!1r:red<\/p>\n
25<\/span><\/p>\n
under Section 304~–B of IPC, as noticed earlier. there<\/p>\n
must be death of a married woman within seven-.ye.ars<\/p>\n
from the date of her marriage: such  <\/p>\n
occurred by any bums or on account of ‘bo’d.iiI_y, ‘injury of <\/p>\n
it must have occurred otherwise ;”than7und’er it riorntal<\/p>\n
circumstances, and that ‘soon befcre .s_u{c.h  shef’<\/p>\n
must have been subjEectedAVtou:cru’e1ty or”harasfsment by
\nher husband or any””‘re]ati–‘reff.of  for or in
\nconnection urith._anyi’detria11d  To attract the<\/p>\n
offence tinder __the death need not<\/p>\n
necesisariljf’  Vhlven in case of homicidal
\ndeath,'” Section 30443 gets attracted
\nprovided the-prosecdtition establishes that the death has<\/p>\n
ot_herwise than under normal circumstances<\/p>\n
 :_ar1__d\u00e91 ‘fti1*theTr’v.-:’the prosecution proves the other two<\/p>\n
ingred_i’e11ts} Therefore, merely because, in the case on<\/p>\n
 the death of the deceased had occurred on<\/p>\n
“account of strangulation and that thereby it was<\/p>\n
V’ ‘”horr1icida1 death, it cannot be said that offence under<\/p>\n
Section 30443 is not attracted. In the case on hand, the<\/p>\n
F 3<\/p>\n
28<\/span><\/p>\n
seeing their loved daughter lying dead in an unnatura}<\/p>\n
circumstance, immediately to rush to the <\/p>\n
to lodge the complaint. After seeing  _<\/p>\n
lying dead, they will be certainlyl:’iJ’nvd’er -1 <\/p>\n
shock and it wouid certainly _take7sorne  thel;jrri”to”‘~ ~’<\/p>\n
recover from that shock and’e\u00bb:o111y   may
\nthink of lodging a   delay in
\nlodging the complaint   suspect the
\ncase of the  icajding the contents
\nof Ex.Pl9  complaint lodged
\nby theratheiliiag  latter about 8.00 to 10.00
\nhours of  of occurrence does not<\/p>\n
contaiii any allegation regarding any of the accused<\/p>\n
dowry or subjecting the deceased to cruelty<\/p>\n
 ha;ra”s.sn1en’t for or in connection with the dowry.<\/p>\n
T1r1is*– omission on the part of the complainant. who is<\/p>\n
.jti=:.eai__fatV}’ier of the deceased, would assume greater<\/p>\n
.’  iir1f)o’rtance while considering the evidence of the<\/p>\n
 “prosecution witnesses in this regard. If really any of the<\/p>\n
accused had demanded dowry earlier to the marriage or<\/p>\n
29<\/span><\/p>\n
subsequent to the marriage and in connection with<\/p>\n
such demand, they had subjected the deceasged to<\/p>\n
cruelty and harassment on account of the <\/p>\n
part of the deceased to comply with  the , <\/p>\n
father of the deceased would  <\/p>\n
mention of the said facts __in the “–comp1ainVt.. i;\\Tori~f’,<\/p>\n
mentioning of any such detaiis_V’gdin_Vthe”coni\ufb01laingt, would
\nbe a strong circumstance-A_VA to.d<:io_uEott.cthe case of the<\/p>\n
prosecution that the  iya's".suh3"ected to cruelty<\/p>\n
or harassm7ent;:11a'c'soon before g her"""death for or in<\/p>\n
conne:ctiori  N5 doubt, pws. 12, 13, 14,
\n15 and"1.,8'to  close blood relatives of the<\/p>\n
deceased. it1r1.__Vtheir'V'e\\ridence have stated about pre-<\/p>\n
 tailgs and\ufb02the demand of dowry by the accused<\/p>\n
 However, the learned Sessions Judge<\/p>\n
has–not':accepted the case of the prosecution with regard<\/p>\n
to.-t__he Vatleged demand of dowry and acceptance of the<\/p>\n
   prior to the marriage or at the time of the<\/p>\n
 ""n1arriage. Accused Nos. 1 8: 2 have been convicted for<\/p>\n
offence under Section 4 of the DP. Act only on the
\n("3<\/p>\n
36<\/span><\/p>\n
ground that the evidence on record establishes that<\/p>\n
Accused– 1 8: 2 demanded the deceased to getyhaianee<\/p>\n
of two tolas of gold ornaments which her  _<\/p>\n
promised to give at the time of marriage’:~Tlfiie'”iearne_d””<\/p>\n
Sessions Judge having rejectedyetheecase <\/p>\n
prosecution that earlier to  the: used; had\u00bb . L’<\/p>\n
demanded 15 tolas of gold  at the
\ntime of marriage the  _ deceased had
\ndelivered only _13_tolas””of  by promising<\/p>\n
to give the_balaricvej.2″tol_as., afte  themarriage, is in error<\/p>\n
in holding  to the marriage, Accused\u00bb 1
\n& 2 coerced  by demanding her to get the<\/p>\n
bala;i1ee_2 tola_s”of gold ornaments from her parents.<\/p>\n
 the purpose of argument that as spoken<\/p>\n
A”to*-lbyx iifivthesses, the deceased was informing that<\/p>\n
the”‘acc–:_Lised” are demanding her to get the balance of two<\/p>\n
 mtolrc-1_s  gold ornaments which her parents had<\/p>\n
  ‘prornised to give, the evidence on record, as rightly<\/p>\n
 “pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant, would not satisfactorily establish that any of
\n\/3<\/p>\n
31<\/span><\/p>\n
the accused subjected the deceased to cruelty’–.ggand<\/p>\n
harassment for or in connection with <\/p>\n
Reading of oral evidence of PWS. 13, 14,    <\/p>\n
20 would indicate that the deceased’ was <\/p>\n
parents and other relativesgvthat sheis beingaslked to -‘<\/p>\n
household work such as cooking food:  utensils
\nand clothes, carry cooked  to work
\nin the agricultural lands  cattle and
\nthereby she   13″ ‘to:’ harassment and
\ncruelty.  argument that the
\neviden._rce’Ho_f’ inwthis regard is true and
\ncorrectand   it will not prove that<\/p>\n
thegcieceased \ufb02zvas being subjected to cruelty or<\/p>\n
 or in connection with the dowry. The<\/p>\n
d”‘1ea.=i’f_ne(i’v Sessioris Judge without properly assessing the<\/p>\n
oral”*– eV*.ide’i1ce of the witnesses has jumped to the<\/p>\n
\ufb02conclusion that the deceased was subjected to cruelty<\/p>\n
   “:harassment soon before her death for or in<\/p>\n
T  “connection with the dowry. The evidence of the<\/p>\n
material witnesses, in my opinion, do not satisfactorily
\n\/l<\/p>\n
33<\/span><\/p>\n
18) According to Section 498–A of IPC, .y””who<\/p>\n
ever, being the husband or relative of the  <\/p>\n
woman, subjects such woman to  he:\n<\/p>\n
punished with imprisonment.\n<\/p>\n
been explained in the Expilanation to Section  3-W-<\/p>\n
According to Explanation (a),’R”‘a_1Vj;y   which
\nis of such nature as 1’ _>theVV’AA\\rroman to
\ncommit suicide or to  to life,
\nlimb or  ‘physical, of the
\nwoman.”  harassment of the
\n is with a View to<\/p>\n
coercing heroyr vany’.p’er..snon related to her to meet any<\/p>\n
  unla{arf11_l’ d.eman’dvVf0r\u00ab’any property or Valuable security<\/p>\n
 crtis._on\u00bb”accou.nt of failure by her or or any person<\/p>\n
related to  meet such Demand.\n<\/p>\n
 it  193.. In the case on hand, the evidences as<\/p>\n
.’  discussed above do not indicate that, the deceased was<\/p>\n
 “‘st1bjected to harassment with a View to coerce her to<\/p>\n
meet any unlawful demand for any property or Valuable
\n,.\/”\u00a7<\/p>\n
34<\/span><\/p>\n
security. Therefore, Explanation [b] is not attracted to<\/p>\n
the case on hand. Even if the evidence of <\/p>\n
witnesses to the effect that the deceased  V’<\/p>\n
to cruelty or harassment on acc:ount*of ‘failimtev ‘herx”–3<\/p>\n
part to carry on household work  accepteldiit. c:an:notV”<\/p>\n
be said that it was a willful condiict  the
\naccused, which is liltely  to
\ncommit suicide. it is  areas that
\nthe female    to the field for
\nwork after?   work. Merely
\nbecause  to cook food, wash
\n go to the field either to<\/p>\n
graze; cattle or’-to Work’ therein, it cannot be said that the<\/p>\n
 subjected the deceased to cruelty or<\/p>\n
  under Explanation (a) to Section<\/p>\n
 _ 4981A   Therefore, ingredients of Explanation [a]<\/p>\n
‘A Section 498~A are also not established satisfactorily.<\/p>\n
.’  ilhlerefore, the Court below is not justified in convicting<\/p>\n
T “Accused No.1 for offence under Section 498-A of IPC.<\/p>\n
No doubt, in the case on hand, the death of a young<\/p>\n
35<\/span><\/p>\n
married woman has occurred within seven months.-after<\/p>\n
marriage within the four walls of her matrimonial<\/p>\n
and the death has occurred on   ll<\/p>\n
strangulation. However, the C:Jurt”‘below.;<\/p>\n
charge for offence undergVSectio_nl”.;\u00a702  <\/p>\n
Accused No.1 and ultimateilgn’acquitted’gaecusedl ‘No.1 V<\/p>\n
even for the charges  In the
\nabsence of any  against such
\nacquittal, it  otxen  to consider the
\ncorrectneslsgg    “the Court below in
\n   charge under Section
\n302 of   that the prosecution has<\/p>\n
not ; been ab}-e__lto’: place acceptable evidence as to who<\/p>\n
 was  for the unfortunate death of the young<\/p>\n
  Nevertheless that cannot be a factor<\/p>\n
fonthislcourt to hold the appellants\/Accused– 1 & 2<\/p>\n
  *g”uil.tyVVfor offences. As the evidence on record placed by<\/p>\n
l7~th’e”i3rosecution do not satisfactorily establish any of the<\/p>\n
it “charges levelled against the accused, the judgment and<\/p>\n
order of the learned Sessions Judge is perverse and<\/p>\n
37<\/span><\/p>\n
are hereby set aside. The appellants\/accused ~\u00bb  2<\/p>\n
are acquitted of all the charges levelled againsitf<\/p>\n
The Bail and Surety Bonds of Accused No.2   V’<\/p>\n
to be discharged. Accused No.Lj’&Xfho.is”,in_:.cdstoti5}T;isd’g<\/p>\n
ordered to be released forthwith,  notv_req1;ired”iri’\u00bb.<\/p>\n
any other case.\n<\/p>\n
Office is directedao,  _ the operative
\nportion of    Jail
\nSuperinteride\u00a7’nt_,v   No.1 of all the
\ncharges to release Accused<\/p>\n
No.1 fo1fth’u:riti’1,’ ifidhedis_r1Qt”required in any other case.<\/p>\n
Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010 Author: K.N.Keshavanarayana IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2aj1oIfj–.O: -.. BEFORE V O. THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE K N ” ” CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1430 2007′ ” I ‘ […]<\/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-187400","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010 - 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\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-18T20:12:35+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=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-18T20:12:35+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1475,\"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\\\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-18T20:12:35+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010 - 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\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-18T20:12:35+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":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-18T20:12:35+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010"},"wordCount":1475,"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\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010","name":"Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-18T20:12:35+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-b-t-narasimha-reddy-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-9-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri B T Narasimha Reddy vs The State Of Karnataka on 9 February, 2010"}]},{"@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\/187400","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=187400"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187400\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=187400"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=187400"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=187400"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}