Karnataka High Court
The State Of Karnataka vs Santosh Fakkirappa Mane @ Aanchi on 10 March, 2025
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4546
CRL.RP No. 100177 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100177 OF 2017
(397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY SUB-URBAN POLICE STATION,
DHARWAD.
THROUGH ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
OFFICE OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
HIGH COURT DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)
AND:
Digitally
signed by V
N BADIGER
VN
BADIGER Date:
2025.03.14
1. SANTOSH FAKKIRAPPA MANE @ AANCHI
15:19:18
+0530
AGE: 25 YEARS, R/O. LAXMI ONI,
LINGARAJ NAGAR, HUBBALLI.
2. ASHOK FAKKIRAPPA MANE @ AANCHI
AGE: 23 YEARS, R/O. LAXMI ONI,
LINGARAJ NAGAR, HUBBALLI.
3. SMT.RENUKA FAKKIRAPPA MANE @ AANCHI
AGE: 45 YEARS, R/O. LAXMI ONI,
LINGARAJ NAGAR, HUBBALLI.
4. SMT.VIJAYALAXMI FAKKIRAPPA MANE @ AANCHI
W/O. UMESH SALUNKI,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4546
CRL.RP No. 100177 of 2017
AGE: 20 YEARS, R/O. LAXMI ONI,
LINGARAJ NAGAR, HUBBALLI.
5. SMT.KRISHNAVVA W/O. PRAHAL
(AKKUBAI W/O. SAMBHAJI HAVALDAR),
AGE: 47 YEARS, R/O. LAXMI ONI,
LINGARAJ NAGAR, HUBBALLI.
6. PRAHALAD YALLAPPA TAHASHILDAR @ CHAVAN
AGE: 50 YEARS, R/O. LAXMI ONI,
LINGARAJ NAGAR, HUBBALLI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M.B. GUNDAWADE, ADVOCATE AND
SRI VASANTH G. HOLEYANNAVAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R6)
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 397 READ WITH SEC. 401 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO
CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN CRL. APPEAL NO. 52 OF 2015 AND
TO ALLOW THIS CRL. REVISION PETITION AND SET ASIDE THE
JUDGEMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE IV ADDL. DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD IN CRL. A. NO.52 OF 2015
DATED 23.02.2017 AND ALSO THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER
PASSED BY THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND PRL. JMFC, IN
C.C.NO.702 OF 2007 DATED 03.01.2015 AND 27.01.2015
RESPECTIVELY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4546
CRL.RP No. 100177 of 2017
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)
Heard Sri Praveena Y. Devareddiyavara, learned High
Court Government Pleader for revision petitioner/State
and Sri Vasanth G. Holeyannavar learned counsel
representing respondents along with Sri Abhinandan
Gundawade.
2. In respect of proved offence punishable under
Section 420 of IPC, learned Trial Magistrate granted
benefit of probation as the respondents are first time
offenders. Said sentence passed in C.C.No.702/2007
came to be challenged before the District Court by the
State on the ground of inadequacy of the sentence.
Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court re-appreciated
the matter in Crl.A.No.52/2015. Accused/respondents
also challenged their conviction in Crl.A.No.8/2015.
Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court dismissed both
the appeals.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4546
3. Accused did not challenge the order of the
learned District Judge confirming the order of conviction
and therefore, it has become final insofar as accused are
concerned and they had probation and probation period is
successfully completed.
4. State is in revision on account of inadequacy of
the sentence before this Court.
5. Having heard the arguments of both the sides,
this Court noticed that for the proved offence, there was
no fine imposed by the learned Trial Judge and an order of
only probation has been granted which has resulting in
justice. Therefore, interference in the revisional jurisdiction
is called for.
6. Sri Vasanth G. Holeyannavar learned counsel
representing the respondents along with Sri Abhinandan
Gundawade submits that the Court may impose
reasonable fine having regard to the fact that the matter is
now amicably settled insofar as the properties of the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4546
parties concerned in civil dispute and the complainant is
none other than the paternal aunt and parties are enjoying
their respective portions of the land after the partition.
7. Placing the submission of the respondents, this
Court is of the considered opinion, imposing fine of
Rs.5,000/- each payable by each of the respondents who
are the accused before the Trial Court would meet the
ends of justice.
8. Accordingly, following order is passed:
ORDER
(i) Criminal Revision petition is allowed in part.
(ii) While maintaining the grant of an order of
probation which has been successfully
completed by the respondents in
C.C.No.702/2007, each of the respondents
(accused Nos.1 to 6) shall pay a fine of
Rs.5,000/- on or before 15.04.2025, failing
which they shall undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of three months.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4546
(iii) The entire fine amount shall be appropriated
towards the defraying expenses of the State.
SD/-
(V.SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE
NAA
CT:PA
