{"id":77150,"date":"2010-01-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010"},"modified":"2014-09-30T18:32:46","modified_gmt":"2014-09-30T13:02:46","slug":"dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The … on 5 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The … on 5 January, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao B.Adi<\/div>\n
 \n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 57\" DAY OF' JANUARY, 2010\n\nPRESENT\n\nTHE HONBLE MRJUSTICE K.sREEDHAR;RAo;;     _\n\nAND\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUsT1cI;.sUB1~a1As:\u00a51\u00a7;A:>;   \n\nCRIMINAL APPEAL No;157\"oz\/2oo5V_o  - = V' \"\nCRIMINAL ApPEAL1.o.1~io.:322--{2oo5: \n\nBETWEEN:\n\nIN CRL.A. 1570\/ 2005\nDhanraj _ a   H\n8\/ o A.M. Wadeyar '\n\n9 :3\" K\n\nAged about 32; ~-  'V -Z   \nResident of '  ' '\n\nManjunatha Tiles Factory' Rte-ro'i;:es.\n\nSavalanga Road, '\nShknoga.  '\n\n '(Now :n3\"::J~g\u00a711c:,a1 oil's-tedyy  APPELLANT\n\nV . {BY  .  *C11oLf1dramouIi, Adv.)\n\n , BI<:1'W2{rE1;\u00ab:N\u00a7'u--"--"o'--- V' V\n\n % IN cRI;.A.""132\u00e9\/2905\n\n ' {,}.uPAa':*a.shurama @ Parashi,\n S \/ o ' Garigadharappa,\n~ -Aged about 31 years,\n R\/_o__ Banubeedi,\n "~.Vidyanagar,\n' "  Bhadravathi Road,\n\nShimoga.\n(Now in Judicial Custody}  APPELLANT\n\n{By Sri. C.V. Annaiah, Adv.)\n\n '\n\n\n\n \n\nAND:\n\nThe State of Karnataka\nBy the Police of\n\nBasavanahalli Police Station,  2 \nChickmagaiur.  RESPQN'DEl."*Yi7 \n\n[Common in'     .\n\nappeals}... V\n(By Sri.S.B. Pavin, spp)   = 1. \n\nThese Criminal Appeals are \n\nCr.P.C., by the Advocate for: the app'eIlant\/st. . against '=::he~_\njudgment dated: 29.6.2005 passedxby the Presiding"';Qf\ufb01cer, Fast\n\nTrack Court--I. Chikmagalur in 'S.C\u00bb.No. 13'\/97; -convicting the\nappellant--accused No.3 _ & 1 y_.re_spectiveIy "for_  offence\npunishable under Section 3.02 and 392 Read With Section 34 of\n[PC and sentencing him to vfundergio }Rigo1'ous Imprisonment for\n5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000\/--  .i1np:'isonment for life\nand to pay fine of =Rs.5000}'*--- for 'me_ offence': punishable under\nSection 392 and 3Q2*Read With 'SeCt.io.n___3f4 of IPC and 1.1). to\npay the \ufb01ne anmungt," to undergo Fdgjorouys Imprisonment for one\nyear and two-5 ye_a;1=s "respe4ctively._V:_--Bcth' the sentence shall run\nconcurrently, 'eut'~the defaultsentencei shall_ run separately.\n\nThese 0'   on for hearing this day,\nSREEDHARRAQ J: delivered the following:\n-- " '  J\u00a5fDGMENT\n\n  of the prosecution case disclose that, one\n\n in her house on '?.3.1995 around 12.00\n\nnoon.._:0ne-  -~ PW9 the daughter of the deceased returned\n\n  1-'om the school around 12.00 noon to the house. She found her\n\n  rrlother'p_'was lying naked on the \ufb02oor in the bedroom and mouth\n\n  the deceased was plastered. PW9 started crying. One\n\n . ;'Prasanna--PWl -- the brother of the deceased came and found his\n\nsister lying dead and her mouth was plastered and she was\n\nW\n\n\n\n \n\n-3-\nnaked. He went and informed Sri C.'I'.Manjunath-PW2 the\nhusband of the deceased who was in the clinic nearby and PW2\n\ncomes home. The deceased is shifted to private nursingj.horne.\n\nPW] lodged complaint Ex.P1 before the police \n\nnarrating that, some unknown persons. has caulsedfpthe niurderl ~ _ \n\nand robbed the jewelleries. The autlopsyi \ndeath is homicidal. V' l l V dd V l\n\n2. The investigation  is  The\nC.O.D. takes over  the course of\ninvestigation it reveals  the incident the\ndeceased    medical conference\n\nalong with   of} one Prasanna openly\n\nexpressed his  for the beautiful looks of the\n\ndeceased, which  by PW2. There were petty quarrels\n\n and differenceslbeltx\ufb01reen. the deceased and PW2 over that\n\n incident. _'  , \n\n  :lllf.Fh_e'Al.l:follouring are the doubtful circumstances, which\n\n _prompted':the"l'lCOD to \ufb01le the final report against PW2 for\n\n murder of his wife and the case was registered in SC\n\n H996 on the file of Sessions Judge, Chickmagalur.\n\ni) PW2 when he came home after knowing about the\nincident, he removed the jewellery, which was on\nthe dead body.\n\nii] PW2 did not check the pulse of the deceased being a\n\ndoctor. 5%\n\n\n\n \n\n-4-\n\niii) The deceased had certain stocks in the Karnataka\nBank, Chickmagalur. PW2 in the morning had\nforged the signatures of the deceased on the\napplications relating to transfer of shares.  .\n\niv) PW2 was subjected to polygraphy test._"--V'[t'lie",:':r_esittlt\n\nwas positive.\n\n4. One Ramesh--PW33 the Police~t"~In:spectorA was. \n\ninvestigating in Crime No.273\/K199-5,fg.fivon of'\n\nThyagarajnagar P.S, Bangalore.' The lnspector=\ufb01lC'.Cl3_v dwafjs \n\ninvestigating in Crime No.2'73\/ l\u00a795:h'att'\u00a3hvagara}nagar R8,. in\nthat connection, A1 to  .__e.a's'e were arrested on\n6.10.1998<\/pre>\n
 at Shirnoga. Ttietirtvotlttrite\ufb02iy*state1:t1ent disclosed that,<\/p>\n
they  Smtflruna and robbed the gold
\njewelle13″~–_\ufb02fW33  the voluntary statement, but did
\nnot affect recoveries..,  V<\/p>\n
  ‘l’he Siipefintendent of Police, Chickn1agalur–PW37<\/p>\n
1nft_)rmed_;ofto,:the investigation in Crime No.273\/1995 and he<\/p>\n
takes over_thdinvestigation pertaining to the case in question.<\/p>\n
 A1 leads PW37 along with panchas to the shop of cw19 at<\/p>\n
   The MC. 13 gold ingot of 41 grams is recovered, which<\/p>\n
 ..__”tf’pertains to ‘Mangal Suthra’ of the deceased. The A2 led the<\/p>\n
 gt \ufb02panch and police to the shop of PW21, 2 silver plates and one<\/p>\n
silver cup {M.Os.1 to 3) recovered under mahazar Ex.P9. The A3<\/p>\n
led punch and police to the shop of PW29 and from his<\/p>\n
-5-<\/span>
\nreport Ex.P39. The mahazar witnesses to the recovery of gold
\ningots, silver plate and silver cup have supported the case of the<\/p>\n
prosecution. The postmortem report disclosed that  is<\/p>\n
homicidal. On the basis of above evidence, A- <\/p>\n
convicted. A-1 has \ufb01led Criminal Appeal_l\\Io.  5&3″ . <\/p>\n
has filed Criminal Appeal No. l570\/- .. it<\/p>\n
10. Sri.H.S.Chandramou_li~,.._V learned C0unse.i=…appearingi*<\/p>\n
for the appellants submitted  circumstances to<\/p>\n
assail the order of convicti*on’. _ L<\/p>\n
{1} The charge  fin” – 1996 would
\nsuggest  ‘PWl\u00bb._2 is the'”cu:lprit.._….:l<\/p>\n
(2) Theisitaternent  Q pw–9, daughter of
\n{PW-2_A2x would suggest that PW-2
\nremoved’ theA:_:gold__jewellery from the body of the
\ndec’ea._sed;V  A it <\/p>\n
~_.(“) wvlrecoverywevidence against A-1 and A-3 is\n<\/p>\n
  –i.nadmi’ssible. The 1.0., who recorded the
\n statements of A-1 and A-3, has not
\ne\ufb02ected the recoveries. PW-37- the I.O. in this
\n* ease has effected the recoveries without
\nrecording the voluntary statement and that too<\/p>\n
it belatedly;\n<\/p>\n
(4) The articles recovered are ingots. The
\nprosecution has failed to establish the identity
\nof the property as the one which are relatable<\/p>\n
6’\/.\n<\/p>\n
-7-<\/span><\/p>\n
to ‘Mangala Sutra’ and bangles of the<\/p>\n
deceased;\n<\/p>\n
{5} The evidence with regard to chance fingerprint:<\/p>\n
of A-1 found at the scene is discrepant._  <\/p>\n
prosecution has not clearly adduced”‘.’=.Qnly 7 ffizlglerprirglts
\nare found to: “be  a.r}d\ufb01fd”..suitable for
\nexamination.    of other
\nsuspects’-and the”  are not
\ntaken   sent =1:\u00a2’\u00b0  expert for
\n u      i
\n(7j;_P\\?V–33fv  .. followed the requisite
\npr.ocedure_  obtaining the admitted
\n fingerp_rint.Vi’ofA”the””faccused for sending it to
\n :cornparis”on,._____Itis necessary that the admitted
\n_ _V.ui’ingerprints have to be taken in the presence of
\nif ‘ “l’\u00abv.f\/fEv’z’.;igi_istrate, which is not done. Therefore,
\nH  not established that the admitted
\n H ‘\ufb01ngerprint belongs to A-1.\n<\/p>\n
 _ V “{8} In respect of A-3, there is absolutely no legal
\n  evidence for conviction since the recovery of
\ningot at M.O.1-4 does not establish that the<\/p>\n
ingot is relatable to the bangle belonging to the
\ndeceased. Except recovery evidence. there is<\/p>\n
no evidence against A-3. Hence, the conviction<\/p>\n
of A-3 is bad in law;\n<\/p>\n
%\/<\/p>\n
i8,,<\/p>\n
(9) The investigation conducted by PW-37 without
\nnecessary permission from the court____
\nU\/s.173(8) of Cr.P.C. and it is illegal. In
\nthe prosecution stoutly opposed the
\nofpw-2 in S.C.No.82\/1996.   it<\/p>\n
In View of the above discrepah’t’\u00ab .cir’curns_tan_ces,:\ufb02it’~is T<\/p>\n
strenuously contended that the ordearaotf’-conviction .,record~ed”is<\/p>\n
bad in law and that the appellantslgidare tobe.   <\/p>\n
11. The contention.’that*ti’1e_:investigatio11i.conducted by
\nPW 37 is bad in law   taken U\/ s.\n<\/p>\n
173(8) of Cr.P.C_  objection. The
\nirregularity in”th’e._ not Vitiate trial in
\nview of Sec;  ‘Even otherwise, the conduct of<\/p>\n
PW37 to procyeedv  infvrestigation is bona\ufb01de, since he had<\/p>\n
 already umade an\ufb02application for permission. The situation<\/p>\n
 warranted swift investigation. Any further delay in the<\/p>\n
 of permission would have foiled the<\/p>\n
_ evidence available against the accused.<\/p>\n
 A.  12;” id The contradictions marked at Ex.Dl to D6 in the<\/p>\n
 -_ev.ivdence of PW9 {d\/o PW2] are only innocuous statements,<\/p>\n
it  ” which does not clinchingly suggest the guilt of PW2. In Ex.D1 to<\/p>\n
” D.6 PW9 says that when she came home PW2 removed the<\/p>\n
jewelry of the deceased. The fact that PW2 did not examine the<\/p>\n
pulse, be forged the signatures of the deceased on the share<\/p>\n
-9-<\/span>
\npapers and that he removed the jewelry cannot be decisive
\ncircumstance to hold that PW2 could be guilt of the offence. The<\/p>\n
said circumstances at the most may create snspicion:}\u00ab._ “it is<\/p>\n
perhaps for that reason PW2 was prosecuted <\/p>\n
No.82\/ 1996. But the investigation in…C,r.No._–2″7’3y’ \u00bb _ <\/p>\n
altogether a different version,
\nincriminate A1 and A3. g V V g V’ V 2 V l<\/p>\n
13. It is the case of the   Sutra
\nand gold bangies of deceased_ A-1 and A-3. The
\ningots are recovered.   that the
\ningots pertainpto  _\/’ar\ufb01~,%bi(1″:bang1es belonging to<\/p>\n
the deceased. Iherepforeu, th.el’1’ec.ove–ry evidence does not serve the<\/p>\n
prosecution to the A1 and A.3<\/p>\n
14. “in iirespectellof the prosecution has adduced<\/p>\n
 evideriufevto. show’  the chance fingerprint of A-1. was found at<\/p>\n
in  the  offence. The \ufb01nger print report clinchingiy establish<\/p>\n
tha.t”‘lthe  tally with the finger print of A. 1. There<\/p>\n
V dd _ may  sornelapse in the protocol while taking the \ufb01ngerprint of<\/p>\n
if H ”  . The fingerprints are not taken in the presence of Magistrate.<\/p>\n
  the said lapse need not be viewed seriously to doubt<\/p>\n
 integrity of the evidence of PW–33 that he took the<\/p>\n
if  fingerprints of A-1 and sent it to \ufb01ngerprint expert for<\/p>\n
comparison. The expert evidence clinchingly establishes that,<\/p>\n
one of the chance \ufb01ngerprint sent to him tallies with the<\/p>\n
(W10:\n<\/p>\n
fingerprint of A-1. The Al has not disputed and denied the
\ntaking of his fingerprint when he was examined U\/s. 313 Cr.P.C.
\nTherefore, on thorough consideration of evidence the guilt of Aml<\/p>\n
is fairly established by the fingerprint evidence.<\/p>\n
15. However, in respect of A-3, the prosect:_tion<\/p>\n
to prove the guilt only on the basis of recovery.evidence~.:Which” is <\/p>\n
discrepant. Except that there is no <\/p>\n
In that View of the matter; appeal filed  l_\\i3i’o.l  ;<\/p>\n
Criminal Appeal No.1322\/ 2005 l_Appeal \ufb01led by
\nAccused No.3 in Crirninaf Appea} .luNo_.’ \u00bb].,i57Q\/ 2005 is allowed.
\nAccused No.3 is to__be setgpatffreenot required to be<\/p>\n
detainedfin any .f3ij.herV’:Vcase.’  _’<\/p>\n
“aw. ….. EUEGE<\/p>\n
Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The … on 5 January, 2010 Author: K.Sreedhar Rao B.Adi IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 57″ DAY OF’ JANUARY, 2010 PRESENT THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE K.sREEDHAR;RAo;; _ AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUsT1cI;.sUB1~a1As:\u00a51\u00a7;A:>; CRIMINAL APPEAL No;157″oz\/2oo5V_o – = V’ ” CRIMINAL ApPEAL1.o.1~io.:322–{2oo5: […]<\/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-77150","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nDhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The ... on 5 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The ... on 5 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-09-30T13:02:46+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\\\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The … on 5 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-30T13:02:46+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1070,\"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\\\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010\",\"name\":\"Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The ... on 5 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-30T13:02:46+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The … on 5 January, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The ... on 5 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The ... on 5 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-09-30T13:02:46+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\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The … on 5 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-30T13:02:46+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010"},"wordCount":1070,"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\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010","name":"Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The ... on 5 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-30T13:02:46+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dhanraj-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-by-the-on-5-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dhanraj vs The State Of Karnataka By The … on 5 January, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77150","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=77150"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77150\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=77150"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=77150"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=77150"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}