{"id":256389,"date":"2008-08-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008"},"modified":"2017-07-22T21:11:18","modified_gmt":"2017-07-22T15:41:18","slug":"sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: K.Ramanna<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT 0;? KARNATAKA AT BANGAL.QRE\u00b0 -  H\n\nDATED THIS THE 1433 DAY Qf\"'AUG_U'ST.;  V     \n\nBEFORE  _ _ N\nTHE HONBLE MR.JUm{:E i{;RAMA,!\u00a7lF\u00a7A '~~ V\"V  \n\nCRIMINAL APPEAL. Nos. 1'.'~3-'\u00ab'i3{'V'__g_{'i)___;'&_;3_._'nl' cg\u00a7:14\u00a7og2oo5\na.1299g2oo7.  I  \n\nEN cRL.A.No.1243\/2007 3 _  % \nBETWEEN:     \n\nYOGESH,   \nS\/0.JAYARAMA, 3.  .\n\nAGED AB1QUT23A\"{EAjRS,V 4' ,\nNo.53, THIMMAIAH R'CrA<I),=.  \nNEAR BALAJI MOTOR,'  .   \nSHiVANAHALUa, * V " ;  \nRAJAJINAGAR, "~ '\n\n'A BANGg3;\u00a7\u00a7;CiRE.  ,  .. APPELLANT\n\nV "  [BY  \u00a7\u00a3'.\u00ab\u00a7_IARAYANA RED{)Y,ADV.]\n\n\u00bb.\u00a7.._H.I\u00a7;.;- V' '  " .\nSTATE': 6? ;;Ai\u00e92\u00a7\u00a7.i'AKA,\n\n BY KUI)UI?;----PO'i.\u00a5CE,\n..   f:'&'.P.IE3Y 3.1%.'.\n' 'V V _ '\u00abz~1;<3HT C0012'? BLDG...\n _ QANGAL-ORE. .. RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
 ‘(Ev SR; H.HNAUMANTH\ufb01I\u00a52AYAPPA, H.C.G.P.)<\/p>\n
iiiiii<\/p>\n
TPHS CRLA. IS FiLED U\/8.374(2) C-R.P.C. AGAINST THE
\nJUDGMENT \u00a3’fT.2.5.2005 IN 313.124\/’.2003 ON THE FILE OF THE
\nF’I’C-III BLORE RURAL DIST, BANGALORE, CGNVIUHNG THE
\nAPPELLANT\/ACCUSED4 FOR THE OFFENCE P\/U\/8.396 AND 201<\/p>\n
OF IPC<\/a> AND SENPENCING HIM T0 UNDERGO RI. “FvOR.V_j’i0(TEN} _
\nYEARS AND TO PAY FENE OF Rs.5,{)()Qf\u00bb FORVOFFENCE V
\nP\/U\/$3.396 OF 19C, IN DEFAULT OF:’PAYMEI\u00a7T FQ.FENEV THEY”.
\nSHALL UNDERGO iMPRISONMEN’}” FOR;-AATI. YEIKR.
\nSENTENCED TO UNDERGO IMPRISONMEN’i’–FOR 5 YEARS ._
\nPAY A FINE OF RS.1,000\/- FOR T,\u00a5iE4_OFFENCE P\/U} OF; IPC<\/a>, _ V’ ;
\nIN DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF’ PAYMENT OF F2NE’~.TF\u00a7EY”‘SHALL ”<\/p>\n
UNDERGO IMPRISONMENT FOR 6″MGNTHS,”B_G*P\u00a7i’: SENTENCES
\nSHALL RUN CONCURRENFLY.\n<\/p>\n
\n
an 1.1-      A\n\nASEEF',     'g \nS\/QAHMED, .  ' *  \"   .\n\nwas ABOUT :31 'ms,\nR\/AT'.NO.33,   *\n\n<\/pre>\n
sisrcaoss, 7raT..:’;A1\u00a7I f?1:  ”  –
\narm mocx, Rg.;Aam:;A,g3zg;2_’\u00ab._V  . ‘
\nBANGALORE.’ _ ‘    ‘ .. APPELLANT<\/p>\n
(BY SR1’B4._V.?z\u00a7ir{5′,Atwf;%’<\/p>\n
” ‘~.Vs1\u00a7A~’mK’cF ‘K\u00a7R NFxTAKA<\/p>\n
av E\u00a7U}3\u00a5J_R-.POZ_JCE,”–\n<\/p>\n
RERIBY TH\u00a7,’S.,vP. P; – . .\n<\/p>\n
I~\u00a3\u00a7GH COUR’i”Bi1iI;DINGS.\n<\/p>\n
  BANGALORE.’ _  .. RESPONDENT<\/p>\n
 (BY s_:\u00e91H.HANUMAmHARAYAPPA, H.C.G.P.}<\/p>\n
\ufb01iiiii<\/p>\n
 ‘1’-HIS CRLA. IS FILED U\/8.374(2) CR.P.C. AGAINST THE<\/p>\n
 ‘J1J}3GME2<P'F n'r.2._5.9<}05 1N s_.c.1:24\/2003 on THE FILE OF' THE
\n"F."I'C–III B'L{)RE_ RURAL DiS'1'., BANGALORE, CQNVICTING THE<\/p>\n
   APPELLANT\/ACCQ-SED~5 FQR 'I'HE-'.- omzacs P\/U\/8.396 Am) 201-<\/p>\n
cc? IPC<\/a> AND sE_1\u00a2r:::r\u00a2cz:~zG–Hits ‘P0 _UNI3<ER{\u00a7O 92.1. mg xorrrmy
\nYEARS AND TO PAY FINE 01? 335,000\/— FOR THE OFFENSE
\nPm\/8.3% OF' 13\u00b0C. IN DEFAULT OF P\ufb01.YM=ENT F0 FINE THEY
\nSHALL UNDERGO 'iMPRiSONMEN'1' FOR 1 YEAR, FURTEHR<\/p>\n
.\/'E\/;,:,,:\u00bb~<\/p>\n
SENTENCE}? T0 UNDERGO IMPRISONMENT FOR 5 YE'-AQRS'  '
\nPAY A FINE OF RS.1,000\/– FOR THE OFFENCE P[U,'S.:20i"Oi-3IPC<\/a>, ~ ..
\nIN DEFAGLT OF’ PAYMENT OF PAYME?r\u00a7’P”\u20ac’.F’ WNEVTHE? SHALL.,
\nUNBERGO IMPRISONMEHP FOR 6 MONTHS, <\/p>\n
SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY.\n<\/p>\n
\n
mmz,
\ns10.AL1..ABAKsH,<\/p>\n
AGED ABOUT 23 ms, ._  :<\/p>\n
\n\nR\/A'I'.N{).31, _  '\n\n181' MAIN, PRAKASH .NAGAR.;_'\n\nRAJAJINAGAR,      \" _ \n\nBANGALORE.    'V   \"    APPELLANF _ _\n\n<\/pre>\n
{BY SR1 R..$.AR’uN’ l\u00e9zjmg; .}J.>V’..:::vF0\u00a7% M\/s.’I’OMY SEQASHAN
\n!\\E;E\u00a5I\u00a7\u00a7J ; –   ‘ :{ ‘ y>x: ‘ W’<\/p>\n
Q25<\/p>\n
THE STATE 5F..KARN}kT\u00a3ifA.’\u00ab.. -7
\nBY KUDLER mucg sm-mom,<\/p>\n
_ . .BANGA\u00a5:\u00a2ORE\u00a3 RURALv–1):$f1_’__.’ _ .. RESPONDENT<\/p>\n
 *  *.:B,f:-‘—sjR: }i. H&NUMANTHARAYAPPA, H.C’..G.P.}<\/p>\n
iiiiiii<\/p>\n
” .fI”‘3:s, CRi:4\u00a7iNAL APPEAL IS FILED U\/S.3′?’4(2} CR.P.C.<\/p>\n
 V AGAXNST’ T-\ufb02E’JUDGMENF D’I’.2.5.2005 \u00a3153 S.C.124f’2003 ON THE
\n  OF’ V  FTC-.I\u00a3I B’LORE RURAL DIST, BANGQLGRE,
\n  “3-‘HE APPELLANT\/ACCUSED-2 \u00abFOR THE OFFENSE<\/p>\n
P.f{I]S{396 AND’ 201 OF’ WC AN’I)”SEN’f’E’RCiN{} Hlibk TO UNDERGO<\/p>\n
 R.i’.VFOR’.1{)fFEN) YEARSAND ‘TO PAY’ FIN-E OF Rs.5-,0G0\/~ FOR THE.
\n” _ ‘~OFFEHCE P\/U\/3.396-G5′ WC, IN -D-EFAULT OF PAYMENT’ F0 WNE
\n vTI:iEf? SHELL UND’ER’GC’!_ IMPRISOEMENI’ ‘FOR 1 YEAR, PXIRTEHR<\/p>\n
” ~ .$EN’I’ERCED TO BEDERIGO IMPRISORMEN? FOR 5 ‘\u00a3’Eh%.RS ANS) T0′<\/p>\n
   PAY A FENE 0?’ RS. i,000\/- FOR THE OFFENCE P\/U\/S201 OF IPC<\/a>,<\/p>\n
IN ‘DEF’AUi.’I’__ Q_1?_PJ_F.?M_Em\u00a7 0:? PAYMENT op FINE THEY SHALL
\nUNDERGG }.MPRiSONMEN’l’ ma 6 mamas, am’:-1 smrrgmczs
\nSHALL RUR GONCURREHFLY. 4<\/p>\n
&?\n<\/p>\n
Q)<\/p>\n
‘mg’<\/p>\n
ALL THESE APPEALS BEING RESERVED AND <\/p>\n
FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS ~ _<\/p>\n
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:\n<\/p>\n
 \u00bb .. ,<\/p>\n
All these three  a’;*t:..:’ <\/p>\n
appellants] Accused Nos.4, 2 anti 5_,_Vin     ><\/p>\n
\ufb01le of the F’l’C–III, Banga\ufb01om Rum1’V”\u00a3\u00bb.\u00a7gt ~   c\ufb01aikngng
\nthe order of ccmvic\ufb01on   against them for
\nthe o\ufb01cncc punjsnamc un;1\u00a2r%1s\u00a2c{%i\u00a7;;J’2o1 of}!-“C. The<\/p>\n
  12.1. for ten years mil to
\npay \ufb01ne <3Vv'f*'.V~':_}ji._t\u00bbTi'.'\u00ab,.. SJ. for cane year \ufb01at that<\/p>\n
o\ufb01hnc\ufb01    396 of IPC<\/a>, further they were<\/p>\n
     ‘ nmcnt for 5 years and to my \ufb01ne<\/p>\n
   oi\ufb01tnoc punishable undcr Section 201<\/a> of<\/p>\n
IPC,   SJ. for six months. Hence , they have<\/p>\n
  this appeal c  than cormctzlcss and<\/p>\n
   {he order passed by the trial Court.<\/p>\n
2. The mac of thc respondent\/pmmution is that<\/p>\n
 “”V.VVI5;V{a’.2\/K.hi\u00a5udda1a’ 11 is am owner of Qtzaiis vehicle mum”<\/p>\n
No.KA~–O2~–3532, the deceased Thyagaraja was its driver and the<\/p>\n
said which: was 11% as taxi through Matha Tours Traveis,<\/p>\n
Bangalore and the said travels belongs to  K  <\/p>\n
According to the prosecution, the .; <\/p>\n
three cases as well as split up  :HfJ:&\u00a7.l\/  <\/p>\n
and Accused No.3]     <\/p>\n
i.e., Matha Tours and Travgls nf}1& a1cI3A 2.’i382A”\u00e9\u00abud book
\nthe Qualis vehicle: for    was booked in
\nthe name of   11: has paid
\nRs.30o\/- as   0:11;    the evening the
\ntaxi]   V’        temple at
\n  ivhc; had booked M.O.6 have
\ntaken the  with 3 small chiidmn i.c.,<\/p>\n
boys p;a:;i?;Pu\u00a7ush\u00a7tha1\ufb01;a, P.W.8\/Pradccp and P.W.9\/ Rajcsh<\/p>\n
   trip is casua} and le\ufb01 the place along with<\/p>\n
the  the driver at about 8 123.113.. on 209*<\/p>\n
    It is the further cm of the<\/p>\n
” igxmsccution that thcmaftcr, neither the vahicle I10!’<\/p>\n
   Thyagaraja returned from the trip. Then,<\/p>\n
 “-\u00e9..w,i2\/K.Muddasah tn: owner of the which: lodged a nzissitxg<\/p>\n
 on 3\/4\/2&2 as per Ex.P.31 in Kamakshipalya<\/p>\n
Police Station. Accordingly. the case was mgistscmd as per
\n(‘a<\/p>\n
Ex.P..32 in Crime No.IO3\/2002. On 13\/512002 P,_\u00a7v’.’3′:’ _<\/p>\n
Kumar CPI of Chi!-cpct Police Station   -\u00ab  <\/p>\n
infoxma\ufb01on and apprehended the “I <\/p>\n
case near Shivanaha\ufb02i, BangaIo_z’e.’_ V V M V<\/p>\n
3. During the  ‘ mvc\u00e9\ufb01ge\ufb01eh
\nstatement ofA-2, 3, 4   39,  41 was
\nrecorded and also the   was Iecotdeti<\/p>\n
and after  pest ‘aiztd other records,<\/p>\n
charge sheet    all the \ufb01ve accused
\npersons  who are azrayed as Accus\ufb01<\/p>\n
N032, 4  an o\ufb01enee punishable under<\/p>\n
    AIPC<\/a> bcfom the committal court. Since<\/p>\n
 and 3 were ahsconding, the case has been<\/p>\n
  of Sessions against Accuseci R032, 4<\/p>\n
V and  i.<~;—. ,. a\ufb01pellants, after splitting 'up the charge sheet<\/p>\n
   aeeuaed Nos.1 and 3.\n<\/p>\n
V’  After receipt at” the committal court records, karm<\/p>\n
” .: ‘\u00a7\u00ab’I*\u20acJ:.Judge, Bangahare Rural Dist, took the cognimnce of the<\/p>\n
   and secured the pmecnoc of the appellants\/accused and<\/p>\n
a\ufb01er furnishing the necessary pro-secu\ufb01on papers and after
\n‘ if’<\/p>\n
aw”\n<\/p>\n
\n
heann’ g the argtnncnts, charge for an o\ufb01eno.-;’  K  ‘<\/p>\n
under Section 396<\/a> and 201<\/a> of IPC cameto  u u<\/p>\n
Accused No.52, 4 and 5 that the apw\ufb02an\u00e9ef <\/p>\n
charge and claimed to be  m*de’1*   <\/p>\n
levelled against the  ‘h
\nexamined in ail 31     documents as
\nExs.P.1 to R4] along     recording the
\nstatement of     313 Cr.P.C<\/a>. and
\nconsiicring    not acquitted’ . Since
\nthe   any defence evidence, after<\/p>\n
he-aria’ g     V. the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
_ appelhjritsf   a\ufb01er oonsiiering the oral and<\/p>\n
  evidence 133% on necorri, the tna’l Court<\/p>\n
  \ufb01n” the offences punishable under<\/p>\n
%  _sect:\u00e9c;~: 395a\ufb01idA2o1 oflPC. Being aggnzevcd by the said order,<\/p>\n
” ” ‘T appellants have come up with these appeals.<\/p>\n
 Heard the arguments of the learned ommscl<\/p>\n
 for the appcliants in all these appeals and the<\/p>\n
    H.C.G.P. appearing for the respondent] State.<\/p>\n
dz\/,,…..:  i ‘<\/p>\n
-48:-\n<\/p>\n
6. According to the pmsccu\ufb01on story, the <\/p>\n
A- 1\/ Krishnamurthy took the said   ‘A ” V<\/p>\n
others Wanted to got to Mangalom  raloa\ufb01g  <\/p>\n
not the Accused N052, 3,4 and ‘5! (hen,  <\/p>\n
has come to a wrong oonc1usion’VL’uti3;’;\u00a7it the accused
\nhad gone to the Matha  a:i%1d hook the vehicle.
\nNone of the  hiiwrf\u00e9\ufb01\ufb01kcn about the<\/p>\n
presence of the : –*3′:<3u1*s and Travels at<\/p>\n
the time '   or at the time of its
\ndcparmrwvi-.   to hold that the appellants<\/p>\n
2, 4 and 5 'h'avcL  .it:~$;:vci\u00a2c1"i.r;;%LL.thc Qualis vehicle driven by its<\/p>\n
 plriver   The prosecution ought to have<\/p>\n
arrangement through P.Ws.7, 8 and 9 who<\/p>\n
h\u00e9.vg"';:1zcg"\u00a2\u00abi3yL– .a\u00a7.}:\u00a2$\u00a7:apan1cd' the Accused Nos.1, 2 and 5 in the<\/p>\n
V said  "E5.Ws.7, 8 and 9 have not suppmted the case of<\/p>\n
  Vviltion and they were treated as hostiic. Noting' g<\/p>\n
 has bccn elicited in thrfn' cmss-examination. Even<\/p>\n
VT  the tzial Court has wrongly recorded its \ufb01nding that the<\/p>\n
  "appeliants\/accused accompanied the abscondjng Accused<\/p>\n
Nos. 1 and 3 in the vchick: is totally incorrect. The Court below<\/p>\n
\\<\/p>\n
hcaviiy relied on thc booking of the <\/p>\n
appellants\/accused Faiaz on 9\/3]  <\/p>\n
and on their mtum to Bangalore    the"<\/p>\n
\n\nslgned' on the trip sheet EJLP.    The \n\n\ufb01nding of the trial    persons\nmade an attempt     murder of\n<\/pre>\n
P.W.14\/Ramalais1?=.iiappa:\ufb01i\u00e9”d%_\u00a7gy\u00e9-A.g\u00a7f_\u00a7%11;\u00e9  vehicle taken
\n\ufb01nm the ihe  is tomlly
\n    lcvcllcci against the
\nappc\ufb02anfis. ._  not made any voluntary<\/p>\n
statements.’ exffzn v\ufb02icn” J Court: wmngly held that in<\/p>\n
v\ufb01nthczga\ufb01ce. of  vcftuntaxy statement the Investigating<\/p>\n
 ”   “amt the place of murder of late.Thyagar~aja. No<\/p>\n
 r’mf;_’n ,a1 E33- :~.\u00e9  whatsoever was smzod’ fmm the place<\/p>\n
  of a\ufb01egcd  and no independent witnesses hm hccn<\/p>\n
”  ;  cud”  prove that thc deceased ‘l’yaga3*aja was done to<\/p>\n
VA   that place as said to have stated by Accused No:s.2 to<\/p>\n
   their voluntary statements. Boalcing of M.O.6 vehicle: and<\/p>\n
E\u00e9iging in the mgstcr as per E:-z.P.24 are all mlcvant only<\/p>\n
against the ah-sconding accused No.1 and the said
\n10<\/span><\/p>\n
%f)’;:\u00bb* .\u00bb:2″”‘<\/p>\n
-:10:-<\/span><\/p>\n
cimurnstancc cannot be taken as a cimumstan&._to. basc ‘La. <\/p>\n
conviction against the Accused Nos. 4 5;, <\/p>\n
to 5 never pointed out the resgiriencc\u00ab’Q.fV;’P.\\FJ.4V  <\/p>\n
ooncacted story of the pmsecuticfii\u00bb the ‘sagas
\nin front afthc house   V _  <\/p>\n
7. It is argued by i;h\u00a7_ Sri B.V.Pinto,
\nappearing fax}.   V.  D -appcllant in
\nCr1.A.No. I426\/   has \ufb01ailcd to prove:
\nthat A-5;Asa:cfi:\u00a7\u00a7s.; statement and there is
\nno w\ufb02c\ufb01sx    v\u00e9itncsscs including P.W.6 to<\/p>\n
connect Acc\ufb01sgd %N;\u00a7;5_  of the which on 20\/3\/2002<\/p>\n
_  __fi)\u00a2y  A-5 and that he never<\/p>\n
 :’$,:–VA3;’  A-4. Therefore, the \ufb01xst cimuznstancc that<\/p>\n
h\u00e9is– Z th\ufb01 trial Court is totally incorrect. The<\/p>\n
V \u00abgvidcag\u00e9e.  on moord is Who}: of matcrial omissions and<\/p>\n
H u   which cut the roots of the prosecution case and<\/p>\n
 or trustworthiness of the prosccutrlnn witnesses to<\/p>\n
VT  that the appellant\/A-5 was also with the company of the<\/p>\n
 “accused to take the vehicle on 20\/3\/2002 with a pretext to go<\/p>\n
to Mangaiorr: and committal the murder of Thyagaraja and<\/p>\n
 %%%%%%% M.\n<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
abandoned the vehicle. Hence, it is prayed that   <\/p>\n
allowed.\n<\/p>\n
8. On the other hand, Sri  <\/p>\n
counsel for Accused No.4\/Yogesh.   \ufb02i\ufb01m  *<\/p>\n
below \ufb01ailed to appreciate the      16. it
\nis argued that the trial  Q  \u00bb.eix.the
\nevidence  ef   the accused
\npersons on  that at the time<\/p>\n
of booking   E\ufb02vcfeze present. The ma!’<\/p>\n
Court  \u00a30   mme by P.W.6 that A\u00bb<\/p>\n
2, 4 and 5 reij\ufb01qnet  in his presence on the evemng’<\/p>\n
S of 201;;\/2302 whee t he gamers went near the Shmztixnahatma<\/p>\n
  Where it had picked up P.Ws.?, 3<\/p>\n
 9, ””who are sand’ to have traveled in the taxi<\/p>\n
‘   thef’\u00e9,ecns;ed persons. Therefore, the evidence of<\/p>\n
_ ee”–x%xx(.c3 d5.\u00ab.g* not inspire con\ufb01dence to believe his evn:l’ enee.<\/p>\n
A   to P.W.6, he rises not Imow who were travelling in<\/p>\n
 M.O.6 on that day, so axse the trial Court has<\/p>\n
   azmagly beiieved the version of P.W.l4 travel agent of Goklen<\/p>\n
Travels to connect the appellants, that on 9\/3\/2002 the<\/p>\n
15%<\/p>\n
4\/
\n422-V”\/\/)\/I\/V’\/l<\/p>\n
-: 12 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
aocuscd persons booked the vehicle to go to  K  <\/p>\n
after 2 days they mturncnd from  <\/p>\n
This circumstantia} cvidcnccV    <\/p>\n
prosecution has hem,     <\/p>\n
thcrcby, it came to a w1png.vponcl11si;f\u00a7:;  th\u00e9appciijants hm
\nbooked the vehicle   would go to
\nMangalorc trip  Since P.ws.7, 8
\nand 9 have 1.\ufb021’__)V  __i:v1’\u00e9cpcnd\u00a2nt witnesses
\nhave 1astv_sa*:.u:I;   of the accused to
\ncome; tgi\ufb01a  “‘th\u00a2 ” appellants have committed<\/p>\n
murder of   ‘robbed him and destroyed the<\/p>\n
_vVcvide1\u00a21c\u00a7\u00a2:”tE2zr  tftcmselvcs for punishment. Hence,<\/p>\n
 ha allowad by setting aside the order of<\/p>\n
  the ‘anal’ Court.\n<\/p>\n
 Chi  other hand, kaarncd H.C.(}.P. appcaijing for that<\/p>\n
 “2t:f $’,E*O11d\u00a71it=\/’State in all these appeals argued that the \ufb01nal’<\/p>\n
  has rightly believed the version of the PIDSOCHHOII<\/p>\n
   that 10 days prior to 20\/3\/2002 the accused had<\/p>\n
    vehicle in Golden Travels on that day all the mruscd<\/p>\n
persons went to the Golden travcks and booked the vehicle to
\n 7″‘
\n\u00a2,:,\u00bb”‘””: .\n<\/p>\n
\n
-: ‘M :-\n<\/p>\n
book the vehicle for hire basis and the same    <\/p>\n
by the pmsccution by examining   <\/p>\n
Hence, submits that the appeal  no\ufb01.  <\/p>\n
consideration. and prays for dismisg\u00e9\ufb02 of t\ufb01\u00e9’  <\/p>\n
10. Having heard.   \ufb01he  ccmnscl
\nfor the appellants and    for the
\nmspondcnt] Stage, —     consideration is
\nwhether the  passed against
\nthe    is pcrvcme, illegal and
\n If   f\u00e9r any interference?\n<\/p>\n
11.  etnfirca  the prosecution rests on the<\/p>\n
  c{vidcr3.g\u00a2A.A. There an: no eye Witness to the<\/p>\n
 ‘=.:\u00bbr_ latc.Thyagara}’a., the dxivcr of the vchich:<\/p>\n
 ._  “brother of the dwcasod Thyagaraja, the<\/p>\n
V   as a driver in a taxi in Maths Toms anti<\/p>\n
 ..  A”‘–r; ;:at*\u00e93\u00a7\u00a7. V\ufb01jayanagar, Bangalore. The evidence of P.W.l<\/p>\n
 that two months after the death of his brother,<\/p>\n
‘T  _ i1-imgclf, his mothcr- c.w.14, Sistcrdn-law\/C.W.15 and they<\/p>\n
  “saw the appe\ufb02ants\/accused in the Chikpet Police Station and<\/p>\n
along with than another aocuwd was aiso there in the police<\/p>\n
5’-\n<\/p>\n
1K:?l”T:7.\n<\/p>\n
\n
-2 15 :-\n<\/p>\n
station. He came to know that the appellants <\/p>\n
other accused persons took the Qualis vch\u00a7\u00a7_:]\u00a3:- _ V’ <\/p>\n
which his brother was working as a  Hc7\u00a7_ie:zm 5  I<\/p>\n
to 3 the clothes and also M.os.4 and  ;b 1a\u00a7’1c <\/p>\n
tied to his waist. The most  $v~2tneasf”_:v&h\u00a7:i:” thxnws ”<\/p>\n
light to this case is the c:i;i<jVcncc;z'df *f5g1*};2[\u00a7{.M\u00a3idciai2Lf1, who is
\nthe owner of the vchich:     to him, he was
\na retired cmpioym\u00e9g of  and he took
\nvoluntary    gnd purchased a Qualis
\nvchick:   whenever the services<\/p>\n
of the  used to ml} the deceased<\/p>\n
_ 'F11yagafjz4a}a.to  \ufb01fehiclc. Therefore, on 20\/3\/2002 he<\/p>\n
  A'  to take the vehicle to Mangalorc trip .<\/p>\n
  to 20\/3\/2002 the my same vehicle was<\/p>\n
'  _sentAf&2:.r hiic.'  thc deceased, after rcturnzh g \ufb01um trip the<\/p>\n
"   to park the vchicic in front ofhis house. When<\/p>\n
'   took the vchick: on the evening (\u00a321\/3\/2002, he<\/p>\n
   return alongwith the which and than he waited for a<\/p>\n
  i\u00e9ay and scarchcri for the vehicle but his seam}: was in vain<\/p>\n
and than"-cforc, be lodged a missing complaint of his vehicle as<\/p>\n
 '<\/p>\n
_–a 16:-\n<\/p>\n
well as the driver at Kamakshipalya Police  ..  <\/p>\n
Ex.P.3l. The vehicle was traced  <\/p>\n
called by the police station    <\/p>\n
was found rncar Bcllaiy and theytagk him t’c. B?ena xy’  H g with V<\/p>\n
the appcliants and   \ufb02 1crc, they
\nwent ta Vaddatti and camca  was parked
\nin a distance of ,1S Further, he
\ncame to know ‘tiiggx   by one Krishna and
\nwas iifgf  one Prasad\/P.W.4. The
\nmagma;  the vehicle was erased and<\/p>\n
di\ufb01\u00e9rent  w\u00e9s  he idcn@ed’ the vehicle cm the<\/p>\n
_._basis \ufb01ne com; vehicle and also on the basis of the<\/p>\n
 ‘rghAag$}s  number and found the photocopies of the<\/p>\n
r\u00a2’%gisfj;a\ufb024-tfadx\ufb01 and veri\ufb01ed and compamd with the<\/p>\n
  R;-C..B5}3k. His evidence discloses that he was the<\/p>\n
pf {\ufb02ag vehick found near \ufb02u: housc of P.W.4\/Prasad.<\/p>\n
V1fhe.’ p’Ia\u00a7ccut:ion examined one Sha1@\/ Sistacr-in-law of the<\/p>\n
  Thyagaraja, her cvidcncc also discbscs that her<\/p>\n
  bvmthcr-2′:n-law Thyagaraja was missisag on 20\/3\/2002 and<\/p>\n
pe\ufb01cc inibrmeci them about the thmwiug of dead body in that<\/p>\n
1?\n<\/p>\n
\n
tank and she identi\ufb01ed the clothes worn by    <\/p>\n
20\/3\/2002. She: identi\ufb01ed the dyad bogig; 33,?<\/p>\n
photographs. P.W.4 Prasad is the   <\/p>\n
more relevant. According to him’ V\u00bb  and <\/p>\n
also the appc\ufb02ants\/aecuzsgd a\u00a7V—‘w\u00e9-Qljnas-. by
\nname Krishnamnrthy.   the accused
\nNo.1\/K1ishnamuIfl_’51y._is  which is at 30
\nkms away   he told him that if
\nany Z?  and othcr vthiclc, he
\nwill a:rra\ufb01_-gc fern mrixn\ufb02xs prior to 14\/6] 2002 one<\/p>\n
person by’    brought the abseonding A~<\/p>\n
  xhousc and intmduccd to him and at<\/p>\n
  that he had a Quahs’ vchick: and<\/p>\n
   arrangement to have it to Jinda] factory<\/p>\n
  for him }’Ii1 turn, P.W.4 told Krishna that at prcscnt it is<\/p>\n
possible for him to give the vehicle to Jindal factory and<\/p>\n
   wait ibr anethar 2 or 3 months and the said A-<\/p>\n
 fvii\u00e9ishna rcpeatcdiy insisted him in make an arrangcmcnt to<\/p>\n
    thc vehicle to Jincial factory on hire basis. His evidence<\/p>\n
is also clear that the said Krishna once had brought the said<\/p>\n
, ‘J4
\n‘ ” 41%.,”\n<\/p>\n
,4-“‘<\/p>\n
that he will send either lorry or other vehicle to  _<\/p>\n
on hire bass and he has also seen \ufb01xe vet-iic;e.:_jj b3} v <\/p>\n
Krishna near his house and the  “ae1id<\/p>\n
materials were seized by the  pibseizoe cf  ;<\/p>\n
\non 14\/512002. P.W.5 Shiva   the
\naPP\u20acHantS\/accused    other
\nwitnesses. Aeooniialg   \ufb01ibnms prior to
\n14\/5\/2002, one he-ad ji\ufb01\u00e9de goiw Qualis vehicle<\/p>\n
to Vaddatti   ii; is prepamd to send the<\/p>\n
vehicle  ._  him to make necessary<\/p>\n
anangemexiisf’ In  the absconding Krishna<\/p>\n
V to    l4Vf6\/2002 he saw the police as well as<\/p>\n
   of P.W.-4 and also the accused pezsons whey<\/p>\n
   in the aforesaid cases, which clearly<\/p>\n
2  indieates has A~1\/Krishna km brought Qualis vehicle<\/p>\n
‘f4-sac}; v\u00e9ag’ seized in this caee and requested 1==.w.s and<\/p>\n
A   that the necessary arrangements be made to hilt<\/p>\n
  \ufb01_1e__\u00a7\\:ehiel. The evidence of P.W.-5.4 and 5 disclsascs that they<\/p>\n
  iiiaave not men the accused prior to 14\/6\/2002 and they have<\/p>\n
\/3
\n 7″\n<\/p>\n
‘_ , I, .,
\n\u00a2-_..\/<\/p>\n
seen the accused only on 14\/6] 2002 but appc\ufb02amgg: <\/p>\n
the P.Ws.4 and 5 and also the vehicle.<\/p>\n
12. According to P.W.6\/Amgrraxgath   V’<\/p>\n
Tours and Travels for the last    ahc: <\/p>\n
P.W.2\/ Muddappa, who is the  tli\u00e9  * A T’<\/p>\n
he was sending for hire  thg;..dVV\u00e9\u00a7t:e.ase:\u00a7i  was its
\ndriver. Acoozniing to   to the death of
\nThyagaraja, the dcc.t:a_sed  ‘Q-is  in the Qualis
\nvehicle  tsgp. the vehicle 54.0.5
\nbefore   the appellants had gone to his<\/p>\n
o\ufb01cc to  ”  from that, he submitted’ that<\/p>\n
 _A~1  to his 01130:: and tokl him that he<\/p>\n
   trip and along with him aocuswd<\/p>\n
   Court wen: also there and they had paxi’<\/p>\n
 .Rs.3{) G[-  ‘adva’ ncc. Since the accused A-1\/Km’ hna had<\/p>\n
_,   through mobik: and he sent the vehicle through<\/p>\n
times’  and to that place with the instructlaons. The trip<\/p>\n
VT  was prepared by hhn in the name of Krishna, which was<\/p>\n
   over to the deceased Thyagamja. He retained the<\/p>\n
carbon copy of the trip  His evidence is further clear that
\nE s<\/p>\n
-:21 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
neitlxer the vehicle nor the deceased Thyagacraja  <\/p>\n
a\ufb01er 10 days and the whexeabouts of    w <\/p>\n
Thyagaraja were not traced and P.W7,2  <\/p>\n
to his travel om amd in turn heyvas ‘imgizmed .’tb _ gy }hag”~,cf ,<\/p>\n
not received any information.  133*   as
\nweli as the appcfiants  ‘af\ufb01oc identi\ufb01ed
\nthe accused persons who to book
\nthe vehicle. He   of trip sheet to the
\npolice. To tha\u00a7\u00a3a’\ufb011ahazar EXP. 17 and
\nhe has  .. Later he came to know that the<\/p>\n
Thyagazrajaf  mtixtie\ufb01al he mcnti\ufb01ed the deceased on<\/p>\n
‘V the bgeie of the  shown to him. The evidence of<\/p>\n
  indicate that on 20\/3\/2002 the<\/p>\n
 pexsons who am arrayed as A–~2, 4 and 5<\/p>\n
Z   accused A~1 and 3  the Matha<\/p>\n
  to book the vehicle and the vehicle was<\/p>\n
\u00ab   the name of Kfmhna. Of course, the appellants<\/p>\n
  Vcxaosis-examined the material witnesses and nothing worthwhile<\/p>\n
 been elicitw by P.W.6 that on that day, they have not<\/p>\n
accompanied the abscondhzg accused to book the vehicle and<\/p>\n
%..,r”:f<\/p>\n
subsequently, on 16\/6\/2002. P.Ws.7, 8 and  have.’  <\/p>\n
boarci) ed the vehicle on the 13gb’ t1 VofV  <\/p>\n
Mangalom trip along with the   L.\n<\/p>\n
aocustzd I and 3. P.W.7  that” the V<\/p>\n
appellants\/accused in th\u00a7:~..\u00a7’.hiIq5\u00e9t”\u00a7?\u00a7}i;\u00a7\u00a7’.f\u00a7ta1:i{i\ufb01”\ufb01\u00a71 pzior to
\nthat he has not seen  ‘V  \/Pradccp and
\nP.W.9\/ Rajesh    \u00e9secn the accused
\nbefore and 0113.13}   they saw the accused.
\nSince P.\\FIs;7  they went cross-\n<\/p>\n
cxammecizat  has been ckicitcd to<\/p>\n
show that of: ciayt  boaxdcd the Quaiis \u00abthick in<\/p>\n
 _go   along with the appcllanm. The<\/p>\n
 milled only an the evidence of<\/p>\n
P;iR?.:f\u00a7,1.VK. and P.Ws.1 and 3 brother and sistcr~ia~<\/p>\n
V Jaw oftkxc P.Ws.4 and 5 Prasad and Shiva Shankara<\/p>\n
  are acquam ted with the absocmding A~1\/ K115′ 11133<\/p>\n
._fhe”fequcst made by the Krishna to make arrangements to<\/p>\n
‘j  the which to Jindai factory and they have seen the<\/p>\n
  “appcllmts abng with the police and the police identi\ufb01ed’ the<\/p>\n
vehicle wla\ufb01ch was parked then: and seized the same.<\/p>\n
13. The entire cast of the prosecution rc\u00a7t\u00e9 <\/p>\n
ciztumstan\ufb01al cud” mace and thc pmsecu\ufb01aon is  V    <\/p>\n
prove the following:-\n<\/p>\n
(a) Whether the appc\ufb02antsl ‘:2,    ._<\/p>\n
with the abaconding  [11-‘3V  0.6 ” ‘ L\u00bb<\/p>\n
for their trip  Ma;H7\u00a7\u00e93?1E”~\u00bb.9n 3] from
\nMatha Tours  V\n<\/p>\n
(b) whemerg:1;\u00a2   the driver of
\n   vV\\v:u”.*’1′:Va\u00a3:t11\u00a2’:r he met with a
\n(C) i8Fh%:th\u00a2f  in all these cases caused the<\/p>\n
% ” hon3ici;\u00a3a:1vd’eatvhofThyaga1″aja? And<\/p>\n
   M.O.6 was rccevcrtd on the basis of the<\/p>\n
1  stattmcnts of Accused N032, 4 and 5 as<\/p>\n
 35, 39, and 41?\n<\/p>\n
A’ ‘T  ‘i’o prove the \ufb01rst circumstance, the prosecution has<\/p>\n
%  rciicd on the <1-rai evidence ofP.Ws.2, 6 and 14 and the:<\/p>\n
'W cvidcncc Exs.P.1-4 and 17. 30, according to the<\/p>\n
 Evidence of P.w.2 that in mg yam 2000 he had purchased the<\/p>\n
taxi M.O.6 and it was being used as taxi by the dmcasad<\/p>\n
Thyagaraja and he had taken M.O.6 on  <\/p>\n
Mangalomc trip. Whereas, P.W.6\/praprlietor gf  .\u00a2  <\/p>\n
and Travels deposed that for the  he  <\/p>\n
said travels and he knew P.\\V.2\/hv!uc'vii1.aA1;\u00e9\u00a3h  <\/p>\n
taxi M.O.6 and he used to   e1n'ver <\/p>\n
Thyagaraja. According "A-2;I'\u00a74- \u00e9;.xg1 5 \u00e9i\u00a5ldng" with one
\nKrishna had come to   "  to book the<\/p>\n
vehicle fer meg;  was booked by the<\/p>\n
  as advansw. As
\nper the  "sent through the deceased<\/p>\n
Thyagaraja   Temple at Dcepanjalinagar on<\/p>\n
 jhe eyeigrgieig of 25\/3,' at the request of A-1] Krishna and he<\/p>\n
  ghect in the name of Krishna and the same<\/p>\n
  the deceased. Neiiher Thyagaraja 110!' the<\/p>\n
V yehicie'  firms: the trip and on 16\/6\/2002 police<\/p>\n
N K   appellants in all these 3 caxs had come to his<\/p>\n
 demanded the trip sheet which was booked by the<\/p>\n
VT  appe\ufb02ants as well as the absconding A–1[Krishna. Thcrefcsrc,<\/p>\n
 " "be furnished the copy of the trip shwt, which is marked as<\/p>\n
EXZP. 14 and the said trip sheet was recovcmed under Ex.P. 17.<\/p>\n
Admittedly, Ex.P.14 is a carbon copy which clearly': <\/p>\n
that it was booked in the name of absconding  V'<\/p>\n
and latc.'I'hyagaraja had signed on \ufb02zenasamc " <\/p>\n
that a sum of R3300\/~ was paid .\n<\/p>\n
P.W.6. He admits the contents 43:33.9. 1?; it is’   = V \u00b0<\/p>\n
am same omissions  oon\ufb02adi\ufb01\ufb01oug in   of
\nP.Ws.2 and 5 regarding \u00a2;=%g4;:md A~5. It is sczcn
\nthat no suggestion     of the A-2
\nthat he was not   of   A-1\/Kr1shna’ to
\nthe omcc- __(>f _\ufb013cAVVM?ath\u00a3\u00a7’TravcIs and furthcr it is not<\/p>\n
suggested  f.1;\u00e9.\u00a7;scs that the appcllmlts did not<\/p>\n
V me. mg’ ‘1’3o}icc.Va1E1V_V_ p a111ci5Las to the o\ufb01cc of P.W.6. Therefore,<\/p>\n
  has  behaved’ the version of P.ws.2 and 6<\/p>\n
  14 under mahamr Ex.P.17 which clearly<\/p>\n
  indi\u00e9atc that  X20-03-2002, A-1, 2, 4 and 5 had ac:compamcsd’<\/p>\n
_. i,”,”‘*?lhsAmzxiing ‘K1ishna\/A-1 to book the taxi and P.W.6 identi\ufb01ed<\/p>\n
,   <\/p>\n
15. The next circumstance to show that the Thyagaraga<\/p>\n
  a taxi driver and that the pmsecution is successful Em<\/p>\n
proving that the deceased Thyagaraja was the driver of taxi and
\nKaw-\n<\/p>\n
W . _<\/p>\n
Muddajah who is the owner of taxi. Apart \ufb02ora   of  <\/p>\n
P.Ws.2 and 6, the p1’OSCC1I1i011 hag  ,  <\/p>\n
bmthcr and sister\u00bb-in-iaw of t}1c\u00bbd\u00a7:oca;.\u00e9c:d wI1o have.{1e;;os\u00a2\u00a7xi<\/p>\n
oath that }atc.’I’hyaga1aja left th\u00e9 to   trip V<\/p>\n
as a driver of the vchickv  in a
\ntank and the police    autopsy
\nthrough the    and photograph
\nof the dead   identi\ufb01ed by P.Ws.3 amt
\n4 in the    indicates that deceased
\nThyagamlja was   taxi and on 20\/312002 he left<\/p>\n
the house dyivcrx\u00e9f Since he did not return from the<\/p>\n
_.. _t:rip,  and  ts; know that the deceased Thyagaraja<\/p>\n
  stxangt\ufb02ation and his dead body was thlmm<\/p>\n
  ckcumsmnm is that whether the death of<\/p>\n
H H ”  ;was a homicidal. In this behalf, the cvkicncc of<\/p>\n
 \u00a7?.’\\\u00a7?V.vIE”>”‘:va*ho conducted the autopsy over the dead body and<\/p>\n
  the post mortcm report Ex.P.25 clearly establishes the<\/p>\n
X  homicidal death of\ufb01xyagaraja. Acoording to P.W.10, he noticed<\/p>\n
adcadbody inatankofhisv\ufb02lagcaadinforzmcd thcpolicc\n<\/p>\n
49.<\/p>\n
-: 27 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
through Ex.P.2I. The evidence of P.W.16\/AS} who <\/p>\n
Dabaspet Police Station, registered the UH}? case’-\u00abten  <\/p>\n
of the Ex.P.21 as per Ex.P.16 and   tie.’ V<\/p>\n
per Ex.P.2:2 and autopsy was s   <\/p>\n
Considering the evidence of    the <\/p>\n
resident of the village coupled –evide1ieev–of.vi5′.W.17, a
\nconstable who was deputed   and also
\nthe evidence of P.ws,;1, e14,”*1s;, 1.63.9′,  and 25, clearly
\nindicates    \ufb02ue  was by
\nshangul\u00e9g\ufb01ag  was thmwn in the tank by the<\/p>\n
assailants    evidence. Therefore, the<\/p>\n
V pmseetgtion  \u00e9at\u00e9b\ufb01s\ufb01il\ufb01d the homicidal death of Thyagaraja.<\/p>\n
  i f1’he”1;ext point as to whether the prosecution has<\/p>\n
 and 5 along with the absconding accused V<\/p>\n
”  me for the homicidal death of Tyagaraja. As I have<\/p>\n
”   the end’ enee of the pmseeution witnesses, it<\/p>\n
‘   .;1c,azg5that P.W.6 has identi\ufb01ed the appellants\/A-2, 4 and 5<\/p>\n
   law aeeesmpanied the absconding accused iifshna to book<\/p>\n
    taxi and he had seen the taxi near Shanimahatma temple,<\/p>\n
\ufb01eepanjalmagar. Of course, the proseeumn has examined the<\/p>\n
three boys who had seen the deceased   <\/p>\n
driver of the M.().6 but thcy have 111015  <\/p>\n
prosecution. Censidcring the <\/p>\n
Ex.P.39, as and 41, it clearly  that_\u00a2nT  they VA<\/p>\n
had accompanied A-1  ‘vu;hic1\u00a2’ ‘byhaiazmg the
\nvehicle for Maragalom anti  _his murder by
\nstrangulation  a tank. The
\nvohmtary  with the mccwczy,
\ndearly  \u00a3ii’i:”‘:*\u00a3:%sponsibhc for committing
\nthc mmtihst cit”:t’twv:   absconciing accused A-1<\/p>\n
and 3. Ofooilifse,’ ._  same minor emissions and<\/p>\n
4… V;pont1’a:\u00a7jac\ufb01bns in ‘ti”\u00bb\u00a3:,,_FYi41\ufb02ncc of the prosecution witmzsscs,<\/p>\n
 159$: ‘bf V major, though the accused made: a iittlc bit<\/p>\n
 evidence of the prosecution witncsscs but<\/p>\n
    ‘Thttempt. The trial Court clahmatcly d;is::.:us%<\/p>\n
” ..cv\u00a7de\ufb01c~\u00e9 of the pmnsecution witnesses coupled with the<\/p>\n
V V   evidence. They have proved each and every
\n  cizfcflmstanoc to link the chain. Therefore, it couki he said that<\/p>\n
  \ufb02ae trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence and has<\/p>\n
come to the \ufb01ght conclusion in convic\ufb01ag the<\/p>\n
sci:\/”‘<\/p>\n
V.   ;  ,,   <\/p>\n
appellants] accused for the aforesaid charges <\/p>\n
them. Considering the facts and cum’ Instances of  V’<\/p>\n
sentence imposed by the trial court against fa: ‘A u<\/p>\n
{be aforesaid otfenoes is proper  <\/p>\n
require any interference. The   any= . L’<\/p>\n
mlalmtion ofthe sentence .. M H\n<\/p>\n
18. Hence, do not \ufb01nd any<\/p>\n
perverse or inooncct \ufb01ndingeiiinv   and<\/p>\n
sentence pass\u00a2n;n.ee1g.+  three appeals
\nam liablcto    _  <\/p>\n
19.   Jagpeals are dismzmd,
\n  ozticzeoxf  ani mxtence passed bythe<\/p>\n
Judge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008 Author: K.Ramanna IN THE HIGH COURT 0;? KARNATAKA AT BANGAL.QRE\u00b0 – H DATED THIS THE 1433 DAY Qf”‘AUG_U’ST.; V BEFORE _ _ N THE HONBLE MR.JUm{:E i{;RAMA,!\u00a7lF\u00a7A ‘~~ V”V CRIMINAL APPEAL. Nos. 1’.’~3-‘\u00ab’i3{‘V’__g_{‘i)___;’&_;3_._’nl’ cg\u00a7:14\u00a7og2oo5 a.1299g2oo7. I EN cRL.A.No.1243\/2007 3 _ % BETWEEN: […]<\/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-256389","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 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\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-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=\"2008-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-22T15:41:18+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=\"23 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-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-22T15:41:18+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":4449,\"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-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-22T15:41:18+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 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":"Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 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\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-22T15:41:18+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":"23 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-22T15:41:18+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008"},"wordCount":4449,"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-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008","name":"Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-22T15:41:18+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-yogesh-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-14-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri Yogesh vs State Of Karnataka on 14 August, 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\/256389","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=256389"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256389\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=256389"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=256389"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=256389"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}