{"id":244561,"date":"2009-12-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009"},"modified":"2015-12-15T16:42:19","modified_gmt":"2015-12-15T11:12:19","slug":"mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\/O … vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 1 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\/O … vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 1 December, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: L.Narayana Swamy<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA\nCIRCUIT BENCH AT DIIARWAD\n\nDATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF DECEMBEE\u00a7V.:\u00ab\u00e9OI3:9f--   C.\nTHE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE I\u00a7.1NARAf;{APJ;S'~$:WAIu\u00a7j\"z_' \nCRIMINAL APPEA:,_VNo.C' ;,_i65\/o:;:\"%'   C'\nBETWEEN  % C 'A C\n\n1.<\/pre>\n
 MALLIKARJUNA BASAPII-A  _
\ns\/0 BASAPPA KOTI  ‘  =
\nAGE: ABOUT 36 YEARS-.. ‘
\nPRIVATE.sERV1cE;’ ‘    ‘
\nR\/O POQNA}i(NATIVAE1Q}+’ BADAIVEI} <\/p>\n
2. BASAPPA’i’P\/\u00a7gTRA;PPAC’BJiQTI’\u00b0 <\/p>\n
s;\/0 PAT’R%XPPA\u00abK0T1″-.  <\/p>\n
\n\nRTD, \"G0\\rr'sfERV*AN:t\"'--- '\nR\/O,_BA:)AMI'  \" _  \n\nDIST EAGALKO1'.   _\n \" ._    APPEu.m~1r$\n\n<\/pre>\n
‘ C – (_By~=s VENKATA REDDY, ADVOCATE]<\/p>\n
1]  OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS BADAMI
\n‘POLICE
\nTHROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR<\/p>\n
C A’ 4_ HIGH COURT BUILDING<\/p>\n
=_ _A”;wIIGI-\u00abI COURT OF KARNATAKA
\nBANGALORE …g2E_spa,.:p,;.,4’f*<\/p>\n
and 2. They were tried for offences punishable u\/ s 498–A,
\n306 r\/w Section 34 of IPC and u\/s 3, 4 and 6 of Dowry<\/p>\n
Prohibition Act.\n<\/p>\n
2.By its judgement dated 17\/ 6\/ 2002   <\/p>\n
framed charges against the appe1lan’te.pfour afor’e.;=;aid–wp<\/p>\n
offences and they have been eonvictedll fof’  <\/p>\n
punishable u\/s 3, 4 & 6 of  Prohibitionv_:”Hlence ‘V V<\/p>\n
this appeal.\n<\/p>\n
3. It is submitted  counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellants  the accused and the<\/p>\n
deceased _  perfo1nrne:l__ on 24\/4\/2009 in Badami
\nVeerapiilalieshilcollegepand ‘there was no demand of dowry<\/p>\n
on or ~ prior.’ to ‘the marriage and there was no dowry<\/p>\n
ll”hafassnienf.~__The  of accused No. 1 committed suicide.<\/p>\n
  VA’\u00a7)(:lT;1T6d kerosene and set herself on fire. When<\/p>\n
the-.doo_rs~  opened Rajeshwari was dead. The sister of<\/p>\n
 deceased made a complaint with an allegation of dowry<\/p>\n
l.”l’.yharassment. Hence, Badami Police registered the complaint<\/p>\n
 Crime No. 67\/2000. Tlfe Sessions Court has framed<\/p>\n
5<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
5. On behalf of the prosecution PW–16 the sister of the<\/p>\n
deceased has deposed that her sister Rajeshwari married to<\/p>\n
Al on 24\/9\/ 1999. 4-5 months prior to the date of rnarriage<\/p>\n
talks were held in the house of her father at Bet_\u00a7er’1″‘.–\u00ab\u00bb _<\/p>\n
time of the marriage talks A~2 Basappa Patrapaj  <\/p>\n
of the accused, sister of A–1 and<\/p>\n
some elder persons participated in such marriage: talks on <\/p>\n
behalf of the accused persons’   demanded
\na dowry of Rs.50,000\/{and t.};r.’\u00bb}g;o1d anti’ARs’;1o,ooo\/~
\nas Varopachara and   utensils.\n<\/p>\n
Father of the same. 15 days
\nprior  “persons had sent PW–2
\nGurusiddappa  Rs.15,000\/- for the purpose of<\/p>\n
purchasing  Father of deceased gave Rs. 15,000 \/ ~ to<\/p>\n
.  i\ufb02ike’ that themfather of the deceased has paid entire<\/p>\n
— and for payment of the said<\/p>\n
arr1o__unt_ sought 23 days time. After the marriage the<\/p>\n
v”\u00bb\u00bbdeceasedt\u00ab:’ went to the matrimonial house and Within one<\/p>\n
x”v’.wee1{–‘she came back and informed PW-16 that the deceased<\/p>\n
 Wesiill have to stay in the gfrents house till she is called.<\/p>\n
Thereafter accused persons did not come to call her for<\/p>\n
about 2-3 months. Thereafter the father of the deceased..’h~as<\/p>\n
paid Rs.5,000\/- in the hands of A-2. Then the  .<\/p>\n
returned to matrimonial house. Again withii1–:’_1. 312 or 2 ll”<\/p>\n
months the deceased came back and on,_ enqzriiy-s.,.__Sii\u00a2’<\/p>\n
revealed that A-1 Mallikarjdri.a’u{as addicted he <\/p>\n
irregularly visit the house and  he’cornes  taking
\nliquor he used to beat  dowry and
\nplots after aboutl yearz   of marriage.\n<\/p>\n
She died    the deposition of
\nPW-16 theilegarraedl   the sister of the
\ndeceased    allegation of dowry.\n<\/p>\n
6. l153.?_\\p7l-lli.E3   who attended the marriage<\/p>\n
talks. En.chiet’e;>\u00a7arnination he states that A~2 Basappa the<\/p>\n
llfather  hushand\ufb02lowf the deceased demanded a sum of<\/p>\n
I   Rs.10,000\/ — as Varopachara and 6<\/p>\n
tolas of__v’gold’ for which PW–15 agreed. But in the cross<\/p>\n
  dexamination, he has spoken differently.<\/p>\n
l     . PW–1 is father of the deceased he has deposed in his<\/p>\n
ll   thief examination that during mamiage talk CW\u00bb~1<\/p>\n
4′<\/p>\n
f<\/p>\n
7<\/span>
\nShashidhar, A-2 Basappa and 15-20 others were present.<\/p>\n
The elders of the family on behalf of the accused demanded<\/p>\n
Rs.50.0()O\/\u00bb and terms of marriage talks was rediieed._in<\/p>\n
writing. PW–1 says he has signed the said agreement’.–\u00abt  _<\/p>\n
is the copy of the agreement. EX. P49 is 0rig~ina,i:e.ep\u00a7{ofthg’  <\/p>\n
agreement.\n<\/p>\n
8. PW–2 is an independent__   <\/p>\n
that “At the time of marriage tatik was decided that elders
\nof the bride have to  5 7_:toLa.sf”  ornaments and
\nR’s.10,000\/– of VaropacAh.ara–.Vaiid  said that he<\/p>\n
was not time-said dowry. A writing was
\npreferred ahoutjtlie’ between the parties. He has<\/p>\n
signed thesaid, airtgifeeinenti He has identified his signature<\/p>\n
 in  Itn””t.h_e___er0ss examination he denied the<\/p>\n
 ‘S!1Vigg’\u20acSt1:O11, in_a”de_ in respect of the demand and acceptance of<\/p>\n
‘dowry.  .hi’sVV’further chief examination dtd: 4\/5\/02 he<\/p>\n
‘V spoke was present at the time of marriage talks and<\/p>\n
 per the marriage talks, Yadi was prepared. Now I see<\/p>\n
  the Yadi which was prepared at the time of<\/p>\n
8<\/span>
\nmarriage talks. I have signed it. In his cross examination he<\/p>\n
says “I do not know the contents of EX\u00abP49”.<\/p>\n
9. PW~\u00bb3 who is the relative of accused No.2. <\/p>\n
exalnination he has stated that by the time he   rat .<\/p>\n
was already over and writing was mprepare’d”v*and the “has <\/p>\n
signed a writing and identified the EXVPI <\/p>\n
know the contents of the E’:X\u00ab’P.1. d]’;n’V’vi_ew laijoxfe <\/p>\n
statements the learned counsehsubmits”that. though the
\nprosecution witnesses Vsukgport thedhcase”ofprosecution, but<\/p>\n
they have statedgthat theyiare ‘n.ot.gaiir’are the contents of<\/p>\n
Yadi. Her1’ce._ there *\u00a7vas”1a_o’–derna11dand acceptance of dowry.<\/p>\n
The evidencge  of the deceased and also her<\/p>\n
sister PW:i<5Vdd do d'1a_ot'._vp1*o\u00a3}e the case of the prosecution.<\/p>\n
 Hence, :iAea.1fned"'co.u_1fise1 submits that the ingredients of<\/p>\n
  Prohibition Act Sec. 3,4 and 6 has not been proved.<\/p>\n
 \u00abhe submitted to set aside the order passed by<\/p>\n
' V the cdoufti<\/p>\n
it =   The learned counsei submitted that once the main<\/p>\n
  Wpart of charge 11\/ s 3()4L\u00ab~B is not estabiished, it is not possible<\/p>\n
'3'<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
9<\/span>
\nto record conviction u\/s 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition<\/p>\n
Act. Hence it is submitted that the conviction recorded by<\/p>\n
the trial court is unsustainable.\n<\/p>\n
11. The learned Government pleader subrrnijs<\/p>\n
Dowry Prohibition Act is an independent enactr_1,.e:nt.V “–i.:Ever1 if  <\/p>\n
the accused are acquitted of offence under, o’trher.’prov\u00a3s.ionis, <\/p>\n
they can still be punished up\/s 3, ?L_a11d 6 the: <\/p>\n
Prohibition Act. Rightly in the 1ti’s:\u00a7_Lrit case theidemand
\nof dowry is proved beyond.rea:.\u00a7onab’1e_p_d’oubt by  of EX-
\nP49, they have been  there is no<\/p>\n
irregularities:;t;oirtini;itted– th’e’VVc’ovurt below. Hence, he
\nsupports the  court.\n<\/p>\n
_12. Ixhave “arguments of the both the parties<\/p>\n
 ‘~  _and:p_f5e111iseci the re’ee–rds.<\/p>\n
   light of the submission made by the<\/p>\n
respectiye’ counsel the point arises my consideration is:<\/p>\n
 Vii.)   whether the provision of Dowry Prohibition Act<\/p>\n
V’ *\u00bbrriore particularly section 3,4\u00bb and 6 are depending upon<\/p>\n
 fate of ingredient of Section SOOWB and 306 of IPC. If so<\/p>\n
It)<\/p>\n
whether the court below has committed irregularities in<\/p>\n
convicting the accused N0. 1 and 3′?\n<\/p>\n
My finding is in infavour of the prosecution for  _<\/p>\n
reasons.\n<\/p>\n
14. The coinpiainant has  <\/p>\n
complaint that during the marriage \u00abaccused. 2\u00b0’iandl’*ap<\/p>\n
others participated and there’V”i”a:r:.as derr1″ar_id*   for
\nRs.15,000\/– and Rs.10,oe.Q\/–  e\ufb01d”‘6 tolas of
\ngold to the bride. The said ‘ldAeIIdifand e.e_dltber;e1:%.e\u00a3 the accused<\/p>\n
has been acce~p’ted:}’by 0f\u00ab.the_”–deceased as a part of<\/p>\n
dowry.  e’.0t”rtdecease’dw–has paid entire amount
\nexcept  they have taken 2-3 days time<\/p>\n
and that  vhas._tieen’.piaid through the deceased. The<\/p>\n
 per_sdns_tA’2Vho dpart__1’_c__ippated in the marriage talks are<\/p>\n
 ‘sig11atorie’s ‘”‘Ex.P1 and original of it is at EX. P49. It is<\/p>\n
‘WrittenitinV’d–th_eVagreement (Y adi] that Rs.I5,000\/- dowry has<\/p>\n
–V been aceeptedd on behalf of the bride. At an initial point of<\/p>\n
V’ .,time._when there was an agreement entered into between the<\/p>\n
 parties and the Witnesses have stated that they are<\/p>\n
 “signatories to it, though fhe prosecution witnesses have<\/p>\n
11<\/span>
\nturned hostile, the case of the prosecution has to be<\/p>\n
believed. The signatories have stated that they are
\nsignatories but the contents they are unaware. The man may<\/p>\n
lie during the course of time but documents will not;<\/p>\n
persons who participated in the marriage _tal1{s’V.<\/p>\n
performed the marriage, but, after the death  <\/p>\n
bride, they say they were not aware”of_  <\/p>\n
document. This would have been adefitfcase fo’r.p’ros’ecution’~_<\/p>\n
to prefer an appeal but they–.o_hax;e nan.\u00a2hgsen’i’i:\u00a2”‘ri1\u00e9 an if<\/p>\n
appeal.\n<\/p>\n
  of the learned counsel for the
\nappella1’1ts’is  of the deceased failed to speak<\/p>\n
as to theuxspeoific .a’e;na::a for dowry. The acceptance of<\/p>\n
 V. p_  itsdeifuis wrongand also further he relies on evidence of<\/p>\n
  2  in the cross–examination that he does not<\/p>\n
 of EX.P\u00bb’-19. Hence, he submitted that the<\/p>\n
‘V signatofiesfdof EXP} {original of it Ex.P49} have turned<\/p>\n
if V “hostile. V”‘But, while examination of deposition of PW-2 who in<\/p>\n
  chief examination itself has stated that “writing was<\/p>\n
 “prepared as to the agreegent between the parties, 1 have<\/p>\n
i2<\/p>\n
signed the agreement, but in his further chief examination<\/p>\n
on 4\/5\/02 again he reiterated his acceptance of E}:;P–49<\/p>\n
Yadi. However, in his cross~\u00abexaInination he
\ndid not know the contents. PW~3 also
\naccaptance of Ex.P–49 and his signature’. ‘A
\ncross– examination he states   <\/p>\n
contents. The crime entered  between the  for ”<\/p>\n
demand and acceptance of dox*ar$Az.”vha’s-..gAbeen”proved by the<\/p>\n
prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
16. The  the ‘learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the appe\ufb01antllgland submissionwtolthe effect that when the
\naccusedarel  offence punishable u\/s 498–A,<\/p>\n
they cannotlbe lpunisheld for lesser offence under the<\/p>\n
 V.  profaiisions of DloWryV_I?roihibition Act is rejected for the reason
\n  Act is an independent Act. The
\n  alleged under Dowry Prohibition Act does
\n notludepevndhvulpon the proof or otherwise of the offences under
\n lllinclian llanel Court. For various technical reasons the
\n   made u \/ s 3048 and 306 might have been held to be<\/p>\n
 “not proved but that does not mean that the appellants are<\/p>\n
7<\/span><\/p>\n
3331<\/span><\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
entitled to be acquitted of the offences aiieged under the
\nprovisions of Dowry Prohibition Act. In this case the<\/p>\n
acceptance of dowry and demand of dowry is to be <\/p>\n
reference to the words employed in Ex\u00bbP.49.  of _<\/p>\n
Ex.P49 have been reiterated by signatories in’t1r1e:ir’ eyidencer <\/p>\n
Such being the case the prosecution has. its  <\/p>\n
far as the offences punishable 3,V and 6’V:of..jLh.eV <\/p>\n
Prohibition Act.\n<\/p>\n
17. After reconsid.ef;.ng the .entc\u00a71′.\u20acud”inatter, I am of the
\nView that there is no infirmity,  judgment and<\/p>\n
order passed'”by_ the ti’i;:\u00e9.i– cozjxrt.
\nHence,.__the app_eal.Ai~3 dismissed.<\/p>\n
        sa\/-\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\/O … vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 1 December, 2009 Author: L.Narayana Swamy IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DIIARWAD DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF DECEMBEE\u00a7V.:\u00ab\u00e9OI3:9f– C. THE I-ION’BLE MR. JUSTICE I\u00a7.1NARAf;{APJ;S’~$:WAIu\u00a7j”z_’ CRIMINAL APPEA:,_VNo.C’ ;,_i65\/o:;:”%’ C’ BETWEEN % C ‘A […]<\/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-244561","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\/O ... vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its ... on 1 December, 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\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\/O ... vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its ... on 1 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-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=\"2009-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-15T11:12:19+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\\\/O … vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 1 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-15T11:12:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1760,\"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\\\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009\",\"name\":\"Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\\\/O ... vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its ... on 1 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-15T11:12:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\\\/O … vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 1 December, 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":"Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\/O ... vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its ... on 1 December, 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\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\/O ... vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its ... on 1 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-15T11:12:19+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\/O … vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 1 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-15T11:12:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009"},"wordCount":1760,"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\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009","name":"Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\/O ... vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its ... on 1 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-15T11:12:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mallikarjuna-basappa-koti-so-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-rep-by-its-on-1-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mallikarjuna Basappa Koti S\/O … vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By Its … on 1 December, 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\/244561","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=244561"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244561\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=244561"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=244561"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=244561"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}