{"id":96776,"date":"2009-07-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009"},"modified":"2016-10-13T17:32:54","modified_gmt":"2016-10-13T12:02:54","slug":"l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House … on 23 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House … on 23 July, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Jawad Rahim<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA\n\nCIRCUIT BENCH AT QHARWAD\n\nDATED THIS THE 23*\" DAY OF JULY, 2oos>;*f..j;.'__'__:   \n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HO%\\|'BLE MR.JusT1cEf;jAwA'D R)'-\\._HI'i\u00a5\"-'i-- .1: '-\n\nCREMINAL PETITION NO.E2%6:2{2OO6.:V.\"_iAE'\" * it 1.\n\nBETWEEN:\n\n 'BA NGAL'\u00bbo=R E\"; \n\nLVENKATARAMANA, V Z \ns\/o. SUBS\/--\\NNA SE\"'\u00a3\"\"TY .|-i~.._  ;\nAGED 40 YEARS, \nLORRY DRIVER, V A\nR\/o. sATHvAvAAi1Ai'A(3AR:.' _ _  -  *\n\nBELLARY.    =i   A ' *7=-___,.-...PETETIOi\\\u00e9ER\n\n(By Sr\u00e9  .  it\n\nAND:\n\nsTATE TH ROUGH. THE\u00bb sT.AT1=oi\\:,\nHOUSE OFEICER,  *  _  \n:<uRuGoDu POLICE STATION',\nKURUGODU, REPRE'S'ENT'ED BY SPP,\nHI(3H:'\u00ab:CO_L\u00a7F'iT, " A\n\n 'RE'\u20acPQ\u00a7\\iD'EN'T,_ \n\n"(av-sir; 'T3_ii.;'_e.ot~i_%.h'i'hd:, HCG P)\n\nE This Ctiminal Revision Petition is f\u00e9\u00e9ed under Section397\n\n r_\/wt 401.. of Cr.P.C. by the Advocate for the petitioner praying\n~[_*tt3at'~..this Hon'b\u00a7e Court may be pleased to set aside the\n'ijvddgment of conviction and sentence passed in C.C.no.167\/99\n\ndated 10'10.2003 on the file of the Pr\u00e9. Civ\u00e9\u00e9 Judge { Sr. Dn.) 8:\n\n""CJM, Be\u00e9iary and set aside the gudgment of conviction and\n\nsentence passed in Cri.A.No.61\/2003 dated 1.12.2006 on the\n\nW\n\n\n\nfiie of the PO. FTC-I hoiding concurrent charge of P.O. FTC--1E,\nBeiiarv. \n\nThis petition coming on for admission, this \n\nmade the foiiowing:\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n
Convictedwaccused is in revision ;a~ga7inst.juidgnnie-n.t  .3<\/p>\n
Cri.A.No.61\/2003 dated 1.12.’2i3{)_6 0i;i”\u20ac.h”e nie:di’TrTadi__C_,H 3* <\/p>\n
2:7. ‘The. VVpet4i.tiovn:_’3’i’i-sitpending for admission from
\n2606’ after 3n’oti’ce to the ‘State.\n<\/p>\n
 4._ .”3h:7.ifii:e petition is admitted and taken up for final<\/p>\n
‘~..,disposai’oy consent.\n<\/p>\n
 5. The petitioner was tried and found guiityifor<\/p>\n
“the offences indicated above on the accusation that on<\/p>\n
8.10.98 at 8.30 a.m., whiie driving iorry NO. KA–34\/4901<\/p>\n
aw<\/p>\n
from Kampli to Kurugodu, crossed a bridge, which was<\/p>\n
sub–merged in water near Naarihaila near Shantinagar\u00bb._4″A_Vs<\/p>\n
the bridge was not worthy of use and was <\/p>\n
water, the vehicle capsized in thehalla;””‘7tijere~;wereg:”‘  <\/p>\n
several passengers travelling in the c;3irer.ier”iporti’on”o:f.__th.ei.’<\/p>\n
lorry and some were sitting iriflthe caoi-n and eve\ufb02ryb_Vody:’\u00a7feVlli <\/p>\n
into the flowing water and  of twlovfears, daughter
\nof Eshwaramma  __due touasphyxia
\nas a result of drowning:,.~~–v:’_if:  A i if V<\/p>\n
6.   was lodged at the
\niurisdictiofnai\ufb01p.olice’}V”sta’tio.:n’ be,\/A'”_’l3W.’3–Viz’upal<amined_ theV"._evidenc.e~liinf 'P\\}"i}i.S'~<\/p>\n
complainant as also the injuredVi'i'passengers"_oi*V'the':\u00a7vehicle.
\nTheir evidence was ioiiim c.orro'phbr._a~tiiiv-ep from" the other
\ninvestigating materiai,  Tigria'i'~~CoLUftaccepted. The<\/p>\n
accused was %_t"her_e'fore"-.;oinv'icte'd._Va~nd…,s~entenced, against<\/p>\n
which he wassvin'Crl;A;'i'io'.'6.1;'2'0O3 reiterating the plea of
\ninnocence';p__ *  Appellate Eudge even on<\/p>\n
real'@?i'\u00e9iS~aE of"'~f.act and evidence found no merit and<\/p>\n
 .rej\u00abected theappeai and against the concurrent findings, he<\/p>\n
is iAn..grev'is?o\u00bbn.",."s<\/p>\n
 Learned counsel for the petitioner would<\/p>\n
 that both the judgments impugned are<\/p>\n
 unsustainable as there is no proper appreciation of<\/p>\n
evidence on record. In this regard, his rnain contention is<\/p>\n
as<\/p>\n
that the prosecution had not established that petitioner<\/p>\n
was the driver of the vehicle in question and the l,orrv"ii_n<\/p>\n
question was involved in the incident. To gain..S'Ll'pi3,G'F.t'V';{lQ <\/p>\n
the contentions, he submits that_ffW.1   <\/p>\n
different registration number of the is\/eh7icie.,..'biit4'l'a'ter\u00ab~eit.'<\/p>\n
was changed. in the evidence,'\u00ab–h_Ve says only falling <\/p>\n
into the halla, without specific'a'l'\u00a7v_ aVl_Vleg"ing._ith:e rash and
\nnegligent act of the    and 6 the
\nalleged victims have   convincingly
\n driver of the
\nvehicle___a_nd'  negligence, the accident
\nhas  contention is that there is no
\nincriminlating  rash and negligent driving.<\/p>\n
Hegyvlould sub'm.i_tVthat since rash and negligent driving is<\/p>\n
.A notlljprovedrt-he question of convicting him for the offence<\/p>\n
 iinder IPC does not arise. He has referred<\/p>\n
toxthe"-.':oivd'er passed by the Trial Court whereby the<\/p>\n
 'acctiseyd is convicted only for the offence under section<\/p>\n
 338 and 304–A of IPC and not for the offence under<\/p>\n
it "Section 279 of IPC. \u00a7~\u00a7e_siibmits that since the accused has<\/p>\n
not been convicted for the offence under Section 279 IPC,<\/p>\n
NV<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
his conviction for the offence under Section 304-A of 19C is<\/p>\n
iilegal. Aiternativeiy, he submits that the pUni_’S1.’]V_i’i’!.u\u20ac”l1.t<\/p>\n
imposed is very harsh.\n<\/p>\n
8. Per contra, Sri P.i~i.Gc\u00a7ti~;h’ihdi._,<\/p>\n
supports the impugned jud>grhent4’~._ah–d. <\/p>\n
through the evidence on record’;’aj’i.\n<\/p>\n
9. Keeping in””-ri*ii.nd.g ‘;2_vija4tfjis”~urged, I have
\nexamined the iower Court” record ‘V’irr”‘s”upport of the<\/p>\n
arguments of\u00bb the    if; . it
\n1VO’f”‘1tfi\u00bb::a_sv  to “hate that right from the
\nbeginning the  alleged the petitioner was<\/p>\n
the driver the Ag_ood”s vehicle bearing registration<\/p>\n
 “At””r’:’o”poirtt of time, the accused disputed<\/p>\n
 driver of the vehicle. PW.5 is the<\/p>\n
co’mupiainant’3–.V_oh whose report the investigation was taken<\/p>\n
Hup. Though the accused had fuii opportunity to question<\/p>\n
V”ix_t’h,e_’ajiegations made in the complaint about the petitioner<\/p>\n
being driver of the vehicle, has not even suggested that<\/p>\n
a'<'"~'\/<\/p>\n
11. The second aspect is about the ras.hVVi\u00bb-and<\/p>\n
negligence of the driver. The accused has not  _<\/p>\n
situs of the accident or the time of the GCCLJ.;).r-EF’.’:{E::eV’J: u  <\/p>\n
and evidence of prosecution witnes7ses:1’sh.ow’=that”theVii-o_rr~agii<\/p>\n
with severai passengers wasi’driv_Ven by, the ac’cus:e.d_anl:l it <\/p>\n
crossed a lake, which was over’fflow_i_ng”_”~  read was
\nsubmerged. There VVva&\\\\’l\/#0″ p_ro;:N:\/r As expected,
\nwhen the vehicles’-evnteriedthe  it capsized
\nresulting in:.:F’o’rtunately, most of
\nthe   but resulted in death
\nof a two  accused has not explained
\nunder  “lithe drove the vehicle with<\/p>\n
passengers onialvroacl, which was submerged by over\u00bb<\/p>\n
.flow_ing_l’ o.f–_w–aVter. It is a clear case of the petitioner<\/p>\n
Hc.o’n-tVr’ave’ri_i_vn_g’the provision of Section 184 of motor vehicle<\/p>\n
Act?’ wh:ich”rnandates that who so ever drives a vehicle<\/p>\n
 dangerously, having regard to the nature, is liable to be<\/p>\n
ZpVu’n’ished with imprisonment. Therefore, the evidence<\/p>\n
it “given by the prosecution witnesses cleariy indicts the<\/p>\n
accused for the rash and negligent driving and<\/p>\n
W<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
consequently for the offence under Section 304\u00bb~A. The<\/p>\n
contention of the learned counsel for the petition.er*~t_ha_t<\/p>\n
the Trial Court has not found him guilty for the _<\/p>\n
rash and negligent driving has to bVeAgVreject,eu’*t{efcaus:e\u00ab.the:u  <\/p>\n
Trial Court has in para~14 of theju_dg;nent1’has4″c’i:e.at~i:>;fu.’<\/p>\n
discussed the evidence Whi-‘”.:h’\u00ab–._\u00a2StaVE)’1-l._S’i;iE!S  and <\/p>\n
negiigent act of the accusedkin,Vdriv’i’ng:i’theVf; vehicle<\/p>\n
dahgerousiy endangeriVngRhuAn’i_a n;_ li.fe~–a’nld”property.<\/p>\n
12. No. ‘dQE\u00a7l’bt, [the’_Tria.lVA”‘coiirt ‘while passing the
\norder  convicted him for the
\noffenceviiuindet}SeActi”onT”‘2VV79 of_”I’PC perhaps because the
\naccused’-was Vconvic_tedv\u00ab_als.o:’for the offence under Section<\/p>\n
3O4–VA_of  There’-._are”biVtwo views on this aspect. If a<\/p>\n
‘JV’i–…perso’n:,.;’rhas2beenwtharged for the offence of rash and<\/p>\n
_n’egl’i’gent.ldrivirig and also for the offence under Section<\/p>\n
3′(J.\u00e9__ii\u00a5%\/ix  the punishment for the offence under<\/p>\n
‘*..,Sectiorfi”304–A is of higher degree. Therefore there is<\/p>\n
“ii:”_mer’g.er and hence it is held that the sentence imposed for<\/p>\n
S  the offence under Section 30-4~A suffice for the guilt of the<\/p>\n
accused established under Section 279 of IPC. That is<\/p>\n
(31%\/_<\/p>\n
actually an accrual benefit to the accused, which is now<\/p>\n
tried to be used, to nullify the effect of conviction under<\/p>\n
Section 304-A of IPC, such a view is wholly untena_4b.ler-and<\/p>\n
rejected in toto.\n<\/p>\n
13. In the resultant positio’n,Hther_e’–,is.;no'”rrierit:?ini.”;<\/p>\n
the petition, the petition is rejected_ <\/p>\n
judgments are confirmed.\n<\/p>\n
14. However, V”ta:l’;ing,_ consideration all
\nattending circumstancegin..i.il:\u00bbhi’C3″!,”\u00a5he”‘petiti’o’ner is placed,
\nthe order re.g_a\u00a7-rdiniggfn se.nten’ce is_,to– ‘reviewed. The Trial
\nCourt hassentencejdvtil-nveracctised to undergo SI. for 6<\/p>\n
months and to p’ay””.,3  Rs.2SOO\/– for the offence<\/p>\n
 und,e\u00a7’Selction  of IPC and 2 months ‘5.1. and fine of<\/p>\n
   offence under Section 337 of IPC and 3<\/p>\n
i’m.o’iitVlisvV’S,;r,..__a’n,’\u00a3i”..a fine of Rs.1000\/– for the offence under<\/p>\n
V . Section of IPC.\n<\/p>\n
   As seen from the reasoning of the Trial Court,<\/p>\n
  it ?is a well–reasoned order, but considering the time factor<\/p>\n
 which is consumed in the prosecution of the accused, the<\/p>\n
33,,<\/p>\n
sentence of 6 months’ S.I. for the offence punishabie<\/p>\n
under Section 304–A of EPC is reduced to three months”;’S..I.<\/p>\n
and the sentence of imprisonment for the offe~nce\u00ab’V~:i_’ritie_r’<\/p>\n
Section 337 {PC is reduced to 15 days <\/p>\n
Likewise, for the offence under E\u00a7ect:i_onj;338″‘of._h:<\/p>\n
sentence to undergo S.I. fo:”.4_3 mo’n_th’–s is sVreiduvce’d ijo”1 <\/p>\n
month. The order regardinc_f’~ifi’ne_ is V”n1.a:i”ntvain’eEd, The
\naccused is entitied to’se’t:off.’_$for,th~e_pie-riod ofidetention if
\nany he has undergone d.uri’n~g <\/p>\n
y’ .\n<\/p>\n
16. 5The,acciose\u00abci–.,.__si’i.aVlI’?sti_rre_nder before the Trial
\nCourt:to%”Ljnd:e\u00bbirgo’\u00e9:t\u00a7i1e :s’en’tence”‘w\u00a7thin a period of 15 days<\/p>\n
from now .\n<\/p>\n
Sd\/–\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House … on 23 July, 2009 Author: Jawad Rahim IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT QHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23*” DAY OF JULY, 2oos>;*f..j;.’__’__: BEFORE THE HO%\\|’BLE MR.JusT1cEf;jAwA’D R)’-\\._HI’i\u00a5”-‘i– .1: ‘- CREMINAL PETITION NO.E2%6:2{2OO6.:V.”_iAE'” * it 1. BETWEEN: ‘BA NGAL’\u00bbo=R E”; LVENKATARAMANA, […]<\/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-96776","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nL Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House ... on 23 July, 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\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House ... on 23 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-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=\"2009-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-13T12:02:54+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House … on 23 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-13T12:02:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1436,\"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\\\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009\",\"name\":\"L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House ... on 23 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-13T12:02:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House … on 23 July, 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":"L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House ... on 23 July, 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\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House ... on 23 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-13T12:02:54+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House … on 23 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-13T12:02:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009"},"wordCount":1436,"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\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009","name":"L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House ... on 23 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-13T12:02:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/l-venkataramana-vs-state-through-the-station-house-on-23-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"L Venkataramana vs State Through The Station House … on 23 July, 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\/96776","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=96776"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/96776\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=96776"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=96776"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=96776"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}