Karnataka High Court
Shashikanth vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 July, 2025
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3549
CRL.RP No. 200104 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF JULY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200104 OF 2023
(397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
SHASHIKANTH S/O DILIP DADDEWAD,
AGE:31 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
R/O. MUDHOL (B), TQ. AURAD, BIDAR.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRAKASH YELI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY POLICE INSPECTOR,
TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, BIDAR,
Digitally signed REPRESENTED BY,
by RENUKA
Location: HIGH ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
COURT OF HIGH COURT BUILDING,
KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI-585107.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP)
THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S 397 AND 401 OF CR.P.C BY
PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS REVISION PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE
THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DT. 28.07.2023, PASSED BY THE
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BIDAR, IN
CRL.A.NO.36/2021 AND ALSO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
AND ORDER OF CONVICTION DT. 28.09.2021, PASSED BY THE
PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-
II, AT BIDAR, IN CC NO. 1507/2015, AND CONSEQUENTLY ACQUIT
THE PETITIONER.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3549
CRL.RP No. 200104 of 2023
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA)
Heard Sri Prakash Yeli, learned counsel for the revision
petitioner and Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court
Government Pleader.
2. Revision petitioner is the accused who suffered an order
of conviction in C.C.No.1507 of 2015 for the offence punishable
under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code and
sentenced as under:
"In exercising the powers conferred under section 255(2)
of Code of Criminal Procedure the accused is hereby
convicted for the offence punishable under section 279,
304(A) of Indian Penal Code and under section 187 of
IMV act.
For the offence U/s 279 of IPC, accused is sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for 06 months and to pay
a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo accused is
sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three
months.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3549
HC-KAR
For the offence U/s 304-A of IPC, accused is sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay
a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo simple
imprisonment for 6 months.
For the offence punishable U/s 187 of IMV Act the
accused is sentenced to undergo simple Imprisonment
for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default
to undergo simple imprisonment for one month."
3. Questioning the validity of the said judgment of
conviction and Order of sentence, accused filed Crl.A.No.
36/2021 on the file of the Prl. District and Sessions Judge,
Bidar.
4. The learned Judge in the First Appellate Court, by the
judgment dated 28.07.2023 allowed the appeal in part and
modified the sentence from 2 years to 4 months for the proved
offence punishable under Section 304A of the Indian Penal
Code.
5. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused is before
this Court in this revision petition.
6. Sri Prakash Yeli, learned counsel for the revisin petitioner,
reiterating the grounds urged in the memorandum of the
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3549
HC-KAR
petition, contended that the imprisonment for the proved
offence punishable under Section 304A of the Indian Penal
Code may be set-aside by granting the probation and
enhancing the fine amount reasonably and sought for allowing
the revision petition.
7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader
opposes the revision grounds in toto.
8. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court
perused the material on record meticulously.
9. On such perusal of the material on record, it is crystal
clear that accused is found guilty by two Courts on factual
aspects for the offence punishable under Sections 279 and
304A of the Indian Penal Code.
10. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court, however,
using his discretionary powers, modified the sentence of 2
years imprisonment for the offence under Section 304A of the
Indian Penal Code to 04 months.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3549
HC-KAR
11. In fact, very modification of the sentence itself is opposed
to the principles of law enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of State of Punjab vs. Saurabh Bakshi reported in
(2015)5 SCC 182.
12. Nevertheless, in the revision petition filed by the accused,
this Court cannot modify the sentence ordered by the First
Appellate Court, in the absence of any challenge made by the
State.
13. View of this Court is fortified by the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Govind Ramji Jadhav vs.
State of Maharashtra reported in (1990)4 SCC 718 and
Sachin vs. State of Maharashtra 2025 INSC 716 arising
out of SLP (Crl) Nos.4795-4797/2025.
14. Accordingly, no grounds are made out to further modify
the sentence.
15. Hence, the following:
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3549
HC-KAR
ORDER
(i) Criminal Revision Person is meritless and is
hereby dismissed.
(ii) Time is granted for the Revision Petitioner to
surrender before the Trial Court for serving
remaining part of the sentence, till 30th July 2025.
Sd/-
(V SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE
kcm
CT:PK
