{"id":23702,"date":"2008-10-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-11-21T15:28:38","modified_gmt":"2017-11-21T09:58:38","slug":"dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Dinesh S\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Dinesh S\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Jawad Rahim<\/div>\n
  R2)  \n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE 16\"' DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008 \n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIN|\":.j    \n\nCRL.R.P. No. 363 OF 2000\nBETWEEN:  I  \n\n1 DINESH S\/O CHINNAPPA HEGDE'\nAGED ABOUT 33vRS,_ _    \nR\/AT NETTRAVALLI IYADACHAVLVLI..vI,LLAc;E,\nSH RINGERI TALuK,CHIxKAI1__AjSALUR' DISTRICT.\nV H \"   jw  IPETITIONER\n(BY MR D.P. PRASANINA,\"AE)'J_.')'\u00ab..jj-.x I \u00abI \n\nAND:\n\n1 STATE 0%:.VK;g_'hET.lA_lrgKA'VI\":\"-if\"   I A A\nBY S,R--ITl--\\1GER,I P'Og.ICE.,,. \n\n2 CHANDRASIIEKA-RA.@'--CHANDRu\nS\/O N1NG'APP'A_HEGDE-.__  \nAGED ABOUT 30.YR.S\",w__'..'0'\nR\/A-T NETTRAVALLI YADACHALLI\nC~ILLA_c5E, SHRINQERII TK,CHIKKAGALUR DISTRI.,\nA _     RESPONDENTS\n ('SRI\u00bb,RAJA._ SLJRBRAMANYA BHAT, HCGP FOR R1 AND\nSRI-. PR-.AMOfD,R.,SADV. FOR SR1 KEMPEGOWDA, ADV. FOR\n\n>i\u00a7<\n\n I THISRETITION IS FILED U\/S.397 AND 401 CR.P.C BY\n\n THE AD".!OCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS\n * 'HONfELE= COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE\n __3UDC;MENT AND ORDER OF ACQUITTAL DT.1.12.05 PASSED\n0 _:BY.._THE C.3 (JR.DN) & JMFC., SRINGERI, IN C.C.NO.63\/O5,\n\nTHIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING\nTHIS DAY THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWIE\\lG:~\n\n\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n
The Complainant is in revision under Sectionfr3c97<\/p>\n
Cr.P.C. assaiiing the judgement in C.C.\n<\/p>\n
the iearned Civil Judge (Jr. Dvn.) & JMFC,   i <\/p>\n
12~2005 acquitting the respondent} a\u00a2\u00a2u\u00abse\u00abq <\/p>\n
offence punishabie under Section.4_3264\u00e9anvd–S06 i.’P’\u00a33g A’<\/p>\n
2. Heard both sides. ‘ V t<\/p>\n
3. The genesis   acquittal
\nof the respondents,    i it b l<\/p>\n
4.  Certain ‘fa”cts’m’a.tei.iia| for consideration are:<\/p>\n
Dinesh”*\u20ac  A|’o_dge’d a quiremoney (report) whiie<\/p>\n
“V*unde~r_j’itreaitmentua’t~\u00a33overnment Hospital, Koppa, that on<\/p>\n
 was proceeding from his house at 10<\/p>\n
3Oi3M_”aAfter’gaytiteriding pooja at Brahmaiingeshwara temple at<\/p>\n
v%’–\u00ab___’S’amapa~~nn’e, the accused who is respondent No.2 herein<\/p>\n
  ‘oQuaVrre’i\u00abed with him near field of one Rukminiyamma and<\/p>\n
V_._:’v”assau|ted him on the right shoulder with wooden club<\/p>\n
iijcausing grievous injuries resulting in dislocation of the<\/p>\n
bones. He threatened to kill him. However, CW4 and CW5
\ncame to the spot and rescued him. The report of the<\/p>\n
Complainant at Ex.P2 become FIR for investigati_’0~n:’j”–.a’nd<\/p>\n
Investigating Officer secured presence of CW1 a.ntl  *<\/p>\n
noticing incriminating aspects spoken to  qa’g.\u00e9lUs’t_V<\/p>\n
the accused filed charge sheet for;”:.the’_’_’offence”;:i_un:.iVsr\u00a7i:a.tfl\u00e9.:.<\/p>\n
under Section 326 and 504 IPCl.a’g..ainstA’the\n<\/p>\n
5. He was subjected.—to”-trial, during Viwhich 9
\nwitnesses were examined’ on’   ‘prosecution and<\/p>\n
reliance was placedon jthree~V::do:cuV:mei1ts~,. ‘Considering the<\/p>\n
evidenceloltlvlivi\/:fiv_.,to’Vl\u00a7VVV’an:d\u00ab\u00bb.:the_documents, the learned trial
\njudge held’ i’nsuffic’i’e?nt’ll’t~o::””prove the charge against the<\/p>\n
accused and\u00e9ll\u00e9consegvueri-tlv”””acquitted him by the impugned<\/p>\n
  ‘State haslnot challenged the said acquittal, but<\/p>\n
the .Con:p:’l’aitn’at’ntVh.as assailed it.<\/p>\n
The learned counsel for petitioner ~<\/p>\n
xv’lu\ufb01iohilp-l_ainVant would submit that impugned judgement is<\/p>\n
._rlr’.arbitrary, biased and has been rendered ignoring the<\/p>\n
“~._i.n’criminating material evidence on record. He assertively<\/p>\n
contends that learned trial judge has not conducted the trial<\/p>\n
‘” Q11<\/p>\n
;\\<\/p>\n
as provided for under Code of Criminal Procedure andghad<\/p>\n
adopted his own method of conducting trial. He <\/p>\n
attention to the fact that three main witnes’s-es\u00e9iiigof’thee’*<\/p>\n
prosecution PW1 to PW3, who we.r.e~p.r0duced4″‘ii-efo’r”e4_’_the_V<\/p>\n
trial court for evidence were not e’>”<4arri'i'_ne'd in. <\/p>\n
learned Prosecutor, but theV'l.l_ea.r_nedi"trial _Vjluvdgie'"~h.i.mself " it<\/p>\n
examined these witnesses in…exam_inationming—clffief and<\/p>\n
recorded cryptic replies to' the   <\/p>\n
7. He;_”s’ulgm’its was very
\nmuch availatile  court did not allow
\nthe Sr.   these witnesses nor
\nthe Publvlicgggl the witness. Though<\/p>\n
incriminating4″4″asp’e.c’tsi”-halife been spoken to by the<\/p>\n
 p’a.rticula’r’iy,’iVPW5, the learned trial judge has<\/p>\n
‘ign’o__r.ed’  referring to certain statements which<\/p>\n
are-neith.e.r_contradictions nor inconsistent. He further<\/p>\n
1″”‘~.__supmits”that grave injustice is caused to the Complainant as<\/p>\n
“g:’th_e~.,_|e’arned trial judge has resorted to the improper<\/p>\n
 V..pVrdcedure and also ignored material evidence on record.<\/p>\n
2;;\n<\/p>\n
y”\\rl2<\/p>\n
8. The learned Government Pleader had nothing to<\/p>\n
say in the matter State has not challenged the acqu”ittal.<\/p>\n
Respondent No.2 is duly represented through V.<\/p>\n
While supporting the impugned judgement he  <\/p>\n
of the witnesses are consistent :f’n”mtheiij1.ev.ideVnc_e,”~7He”:<\/p>\n
submits that there is contradigctionetein  evid_-ence’~oVi*::’the”~.<\/p>\n
witnesses. While the Comp|ai’naiit savg. thetf’.:he’1.Vg4suffered<\/p>\n
injuries on the right sh’ouAlder;i””Piitl.34land’ eye”wit’ness say
\nvictim suffered injuries on  shoulder. He
\nfurther submits;..tl’a:aVt:p1’i.ncaAnVsi%steint’\u00ab:statern.erji’tv:Vdoes not render
\nany assistante  rightly the acquittal<\/p>\n
has beei1..Arecoi*de’ud~ trial judge.\n<\/p>\n
9. ‘V}”‘s\u00abt_Vetl1eVv’o.uts.et’.i:li.’i’is noticed that CW1 to 3, who<\/p>\n
.—.yvere_\u00bb\u00bb’t:endered t3Aefo.r_e___the court for examination in chief,<\/p>\n
shave” not._Vbee’ne”ex_amined by the Public Prosecutor assigned<\/p>\n
to ‘th\u00ab.a’t \u00abCon  f_  V V J<\/p>\n
10.”e_T’h”e provisions of Section 135 of the Evidence<\/p>\n
 ‘envisages that ‘the order in which witnesses produced<\/p>\n
 examined shall be regulated by law and practice for the<\/p>\n
‘\ufb01ithilme being relating to civil and criminal procedure<\/p>\n
respectively, and, in the absence of any such law, by the<\/p>\n
discretion of court.’ Under the provisions of Section,.Vi\u00bb.3’_E$._Vof<\/p>\n
the Evidence Act, discretion is given to the <\/p>\n
admissibility of the evidence. But, the provisionsi:ol:’Siectionl\u00e9 ‘v <\/p>\n
3.37 of the Evidence Act, mandates  exami’nat’io’-ng_~i~n;e_it<\/p>\n
chief of witnesses by the party’w..ho ca’iif.s’him  be called <\/p>\n
his examination~in–chief. Therefo’yre,._\\und’ou.btedly;: in the
\ninstant case, CW1 to re  who have been
\ncalled by the prose_cution.\u00bbw. are called
\nby the prosecui.:fo’n}ylit’ is::”foi’;_the_’:bii|j’lVi’cProsecutor assigned<\/p>\n
to the court\u00bb, *t.o:f_ex’am.in’e.’ \u00abthemwho is a Prosecutor<\/p>\n
appointed under of Section 24 of the Criminal<\/p>\n
Procedure Code for  of the case and in that regard<\/p>\n
_._to examine the witne_ss_es in chief.\n<\/p>\n
 scheme of the Code of Criminal<\/p>\n
Proce,dureV,.  is a prescription of procedure for conduct<\/p>\n
 trial” dependant upon the nature of charge. The<\/p>\n
  “coiis_p’et:tus of the provisions contained in Chapter XIX i.e.<\/p>\n
V.”l–..\ufb02SeHctions 238 to 245 deal with trial of warrant cases and<\/p>\n
 ~ yfsimilarly Chapter–XX deals with trial of summons cases.<\/p>\n
Undoubtedly the case in question relates to charge for<\/p>\n
offence to be tried as warrant case. Section–242
\nprescribes the specific procedure for recording of evidence<\/p>\n
for prosecution. It reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
“242. Evidence for prosecution:\n<\/p>\n
(1) If the accused refusesfitol:pI’ead__ <\/p>\n
plead, or claims to be tried–_or th’e_..r.\u00a3Viag\u00ab.ist-fate”<\/p>\n
does not convict th’e_’a:.cuseAd- under”s_ect_:Io–n..2i41,
\nthe Magistrate shalitfix aedwate for the
\nexamination   <\/p>\n
(2) The Magistrate V”ap’p!__ication of the
\nprosecuti__on,;i’ss’ue’:: to any of its<\/p>\n
witVn_ess:?es_,di.recting hi4_rn.t’o’att’end or to produce<\/p>\n
 ffff   otherwthing.\n<\/p>\n
(3)’_ On ‘the=’fdate_._’i’so:’fixed, the Magistrate shall<\/p>\n
proceed”  all such evidence as may be<\/p>\n
i ”  prod’uc_ed”in support of the prosecution.<\/p>\n
Pro.vi’de’d._i:h.at the Magistrate may permit the cross-
\n“‘l’.epxairii’n,a_tio’n”of any witness to be deferred until any
\nA*—other~wi’tness or witnesses have been examined or<\/p>\n
reca|it.any witness for further cross-examination.”
\n  is__ci_ear from the provisions of Section~242 extracted<\/p>\n
V.’Vi’-dgaborve that the Magistrate, when the accused pleads not<\/p>\n
 ‘lfguilty, shall fix a date for the examination of the witnesses.<\/p>\n
as<\/p>\n
Sub~section (2) envisages the Magistrate may, on the<\/p>\n
application of the prosecution, issue summons to anyiof-.,its<\/p>\n
witnesses directing him to attend or to <\/p>\n
document or other thing. Sub–section (3) is <\/p>\n
which requires, on the date so  MagIi’st.ra’te~_sha|,_l<\/p>\n
proceed to take all such evidence asgmay be,.,or.odu”ced in <\/p>\n
support of the prosecution.  pr’oyiso.”‘.=spieclifically
\nmandates the Magistrateinigay oe’rmi-t:,th,e-..cross;e$<amination by the defence. The Magistrate is not<\/p>\n
"elernlpowered to examine the witnesses in–chief by himself as<\/p>\n
is done in the instant case.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
12. No doubt Section~165 of the Evidence”‘~–.Act<\/p>\n
permits the Judge to put such questions as the  V.<\/p>\n
feel necessary in order to discover or to obtain propve’r..p’r’oo:’rf V’ <\/p>\n
of relevant facts. On forming suc’h”‘cP.in.ion;,  <\/p>\n
may ask any question he pleases, in:’a_ny–_form,”at ‘am: ti~n’1’e,V”~<\/p>\n
of any witness or of the party-i..,yabo_ut any  or it<\/p>\n
irreievant and may order th.e””p’r_foriVu”c7tion ‘o1″”~ any such
\ndocument. To exercise ‘ the  povyerV”_\u00bb..c’o–nferred under
\nSection~165, the–icircurn;stancesenlurnerated there should<\/p>\n
exist. ‘ Thegmanner-“:i_Vn’Vwh–ich._the ‘trial_ has been conducted<\/p>\n
in this  theumiearned trial Judge has
\nexamineci7th’e%  ignoring the provisions<\/p>\n
referred to ablove. ‘ –\n<\/p>\n
  matter of regret that iearned trial Judge<\/p>\n
has questions and eiicited two answers in<\/p>\n
‘Vthree.44se.n”ten’ces and that has been made basis foracquittal<\/p>\n
  At.he…\u00e9accused. The contention of the learned counsel for<\/p>\n
Qpetitiolner that whole proceeding as conducted by theltriai<\/p>\n
“”i.VVJ’iidge gives an impression that the trial is virtuaiiy stage<\/p>\n
managed for grant of an acquittai of the accused, is not<\/p>\n
&,%’i\/<\/p>\n
,1<\/p>\n
without substance. Serious view needs to be taken as to
\nthe method appiied to conduct the trial, in contravention of
\nthe prescribed procedure. It is further noticed that the<\/p>\n
learned triai judge has recorded no reason as to why<\/p>\n
proceeded to examine the witnesses in chief  .<\/p>\n
requiring the prosecution to do so who was'”‘p’resfent;- as is <\/p>\n
evident from the order sheet.\n<\/p>\n
14. To know as to.\u00bb’w.hether._the  <\/p>\n
Prosecutor was avaiiable or notvifhaxre exandinned the LCR
\nand order sheet. The ord-e.r”she_et;Vtof’.G–35iAi~+2O05 shows that<\/p>\n
when CW1  the learned trial judge
\nthe StateVFfub|Aic  very much available and<\/p>\n
present. ., No rea_son..i”s recorded as to why the learned State<\/p>\n
I-l.’v’V’Pub|it;— Pro’srec’u.tor nadna examined the witnesses in chief<\/p>\n
or. as_r.tow:li–et’her_he was prevented.<\/p>\n
A ‘–.15.’ThTislis also a reason to take note of the conduct<\/p>\n
 the concerned Public Prosecutor. In the circumstances,<\/p>\n
  direction needs to be issued to the Director of<\/p>\n
 ’11’ ‘w.!1>.ro.secution to obtain explanation from the concerned State<\/p>\n
A ” ~ ” Public Prosecutor as to why the witness Cwl to 6 were not<\/p>\n
I?\n<\/p>\n
approach of the trial court in appreciation of the evidence,
\nunjust acquittal is recorded.\n<\/p>\n
16. Further, it is noticed that though <\/p>\n
identified the assailant and has mentioned the_–A4’p’revse’ric’e~f <\/p>\n
other witnesses, but the learned tria.l~jud4ge  if<\/p>\n
evidence observing that;\n<\/p>\n
“pwa deposed that o’.’~g\u00a7i3,1x–3~2ioo5.
\ncomplaint of injured Comp|a’i\u00abnant_ he regi_stere}:l
\ncrime in Cr. No.25\/LG’5e_. PW9_’diepVos’e-d regarding
\nthe receiving of memou,f’rom__i’hospit_al and<\/p>\n
recording of”statem’e’n’t::tof.’C.o>rnp!Vainant in the<\/p>\n
ho7s__pit_al.fAVVVT’i1e.__iWVg7’PSI___d–eposed with regard to<\/p>\n
drawing up  the spot and seizure<\/p>\n
of club. ‘ar1VCl[–_  completion of formal<\/p>\n
‘ v.\u00bb’i.:nvestigatiVo’ri~wSubmission of charge sheet. As<\/p>\n
 “V.’the:prosecution failed to prove the alleged<\/p>\n
‘in’c.i:cie_nt4Vxthrough the mouth of very material<\/p>\n
 the evidence of these witnesses
\n formal in nature is of no avail.”\n<\/p>\n
 A. ,_’17.V\u00b0”.This observation is totally contradictory to the<\/p>\n
 ‘.’_j\u00ab~stiatement on oath of PW5, which reads:<\/p>\n
\/’<\/p>\n
(M-\n<\/p>\n
\/3<\/p>\n
” The accused is the son of my father’s elder
\nbrother. On 30-03-2005 while I was coming
\ntowards my house at about 1G–30PM from
\nBrahmalingeshwara temple at Samapanne,\u00e9.._\u00e9:tVV”‘\ufb02”~t..V”‘l
\nthat tiem the accused picked up the  ”\n<\/p>\n
with me in the field of one Rukminiuam’ma:.\u00a7::~nd”V: =
\nassaulted me on my right shoulder’
\nof wooden club, due to which*I__ suVstain’evd_ast.ili\u00ab. V’
\ninjuries. Further the accu.s:ed_threatenedhto
\nme. At that time the   the<\/p>\n
spot and pacified :t’h_e g’al’ata’l:,_ffhereafteryivvI
\ncame to my house: my
\ntelephone ‘?’.iE5__in C;\u00a7i’so’r’J1:’V\u00a7rV.:5″i1\/:d~.F?Ven:..V’t’here was<\/p>\n
no bus tolgoitai Sr’in.g’eEi'”P;’st. and to
\nloclole\ufb02lthe  _ .V<\/p>\n
Such assertli”o.n’vi’ctim was dislodged in cross<\/p>\n
“‘~examiiniatylon…y_Therefo~r-egthe trial court had to record reason<\/p>\n
rlto’-w’h_y’ls’uch*–.”evidence had to be ignored. In the<\/p>\n
circLIm’stanAcesi.,_  am satisfied that the order passed by the<\/p>\n
VV._’vlearned trial judge acquitting the accused could hardly be<\/p>\n
  “s_’us.tali”n\u00abed and require to be set aside. Accordingly, the<\/p>\n
 .___”sarne is set aside.\n<\/p>\n
\ufb02u<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Dinesh S\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008 Author: Jawad Rahim R2) IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 16″‘ DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAWAD RAHIN|”:.j CRL.R.P. No. 363 OF 2000 BETWEEN: I 1 DINESH S\/O CHINNAPPA HEGDE’ AGED […]<\/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-23702","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nDinesh S\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008 - 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\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dinesh S\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-21T09:58:38+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dinesh S\\\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-21T09:58:38+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2025,\"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\\\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Dinesh S\\\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-21T09:58:38+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dinesh S\\\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Dinesh S\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008 - 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\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dinesh S\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-21T09:58:38+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dinesh S\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-21T09:58:38+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008"},"wordCount":2025,"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\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008","name":"Dinesh S\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-21T09:58:38+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dinesh-so-chinnappa-hegde-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-16-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dinesh S\/O Chinnappa Hegde vs State Of Karnataka on 16 October, 2008"}]},{"@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\/23702","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=23702"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23702\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=23702"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=23702"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=23702"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}