Karnataka High Court
Ismail S/O Abudl Majid vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 March, 2025
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
CRL.RP No. 100124 of 2023
C/W CRL.RP No. 100127 of 2023
CRL.RP No. 100128 of 2023
AND 1 OTHER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100124 OF 2023
(397(CR.PC)/438(BNSS))
C/W
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100127 OF 2023
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100128 OF 2023
CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.100129 OF 2023
IN CRL.RP.NO.100124/2023:
BETWEEN:
1. ZIYA TAJUDDIN S/O. TAJJUDDIN,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC.
R/O. BADRIYA COLONY, TAGARGOD JALI,
Digitally
signed by
TQ. BHATKAL, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
VN
VN BADIGER
BADIGER Date:
2025.03.28
10:41:17
+0530
2. MR.SAFAN S/O. K.IBRAHIM,
AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC.
R/O. 1ST CROSS, MOHIDDIN STREET,
TQ. BHATKAL, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
3. ABDUL REHAMAN S/O. SHABBIR VADKAR,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC.
R/O. BADRIYA COLONY, TAGARGOD JALI,
TQ. BHATKAL, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI VENKATESH M.KHARVI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
CRL.RP No. 100124 of 2023
C/W CRL.RP No. 100127 of 2023
CRL.RP No. 100128 of 2023
AND 1 OTHER
BY BHATKAL RURAL POLICE,
R/BY. S.P.P. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD-581320.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/S. 397 R/W.
401 OF CR.PC., SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS ON
THE FILE OF JMFC BHATKAL IN CC NO. 935/2014 DATED 11.09.2017
AND ORDER PASSED IN CRL APPEAL NO. 49/2017 PASSED BY II
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE UTTARA KANNADA, KARWAR
DATED 22.12.2022 AND TO ALLOW THIS PETITION BY SETTING
ASIDE JUDGMENT DATED 22.12.2022 PASSED BY THE II ADDL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UTTARA KANNADA, KARWAR IN
CRL.APPEAL NO. 49/2017 AND CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED IN CC NO. 935/2014 ON THE FILE JMFC BHATKAL
DATED 11.09.2017 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 143, 147, 447, 448, 341, 323, 324, 326, 506 AND 427
R/W. 149 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(2) (a) OF THE PREVENTION OF
DAMAGE TO PUBLIC PROPERTY ACT 1984, SO FAR AS ACCUSED
NOS. 2,4 AND 5 ARE CONCERN.
IN CRL.RP.NO.100127/2023:
BETWEEN:
IRFAN S/O. MEHABOOBSAB,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC.
R/O. TAGARGOD, TQ. BHATKAL,
DIST. UTTAR KANNADA-581320.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI VENKATESH M. KHARVI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BHATKAL RURAL POLICE,
R/BY. S.P.P. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 397
R/W. 401 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS
ON THE FILE OF JMFC BHATKAL IN C.C.NO. 935/2014 DATED
11.09.2017 AND ORDER PASSED IN CRL. APPEAL NO. 48/2017
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
CRL.RP No. 100124 of 2023
C/W CRL.RP No. 100127 of 2023
CRL.RP No. 100128 of 2023
AND 1 OTHER
PASSED BY II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE UTTARA
KANNADA, KARWAR DATED 22.12.2022 AND ALLOW THIS PETITION
BY SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT DATED 22.12.2022 PASSED BY THE II
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UTTARA KANNADA,
KARWAR IN CRL.APPEAL NO. 48/2017 AND CONSEQUENTLY SET
ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN C.C.NO. 935/2014 ON THE FILE JMFC
BHATKAL DATED 11.09.2017 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
U/SECTIONS 143, 147, 447, 448, 341, 323, 324, 326, 506 AND 427
R/W. 49 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(2)(a) OF THE PREVENTION OF
DAMAGE TO PUBLIC PROPERLY ACT, 1984 IN SO FAR AS ACCUSED
NO.1 IS CONCERN.
IN CRL.RP.NO.100128/2023:
BETWEEN:
1. ISMAIL S/O. ABUDL MAJID,
AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC.
R/O. BENDEKHAN, TQ. BHATKAL,
DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
2. NURULLA ISLAM S/O. MOHIDIN SIDDIBAPPA,
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC.
R/O. MUSANAGAR, BENDAKHAN,
NEAR ISUF PALI, BHATKAL, TQ. BHATKAL,
DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
3. ALI S/O. MOHAMMAD HANIF SHIEK,
AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC.
R/O. NEAR MURMARG, BHATKAL, TQ. BHATKAL,
DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI VENKATESH M. KHARVI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BHATKAL RURAL POLICE,
R/BY. S.P.P. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 397
R/W. 401 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS
ON THE FILE OF LEARNED JMFC BHATKAL IN C.C.NO. 935/2014
DATED 11.09.2017 AND ORDER PASSED IN CRL. APPEAL NO.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
CRL.RP No. 100124 of 2023
C/W CRL.RP No. 100127 of 2023
CRL.RP No. 100128 of 2023
AND 1 OTHER
45/2017 PASSED BY II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE
UTTARA KANNADA, KARWAR DATED 22.12.2022 AND ALLOW THIS
PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT DATED 22.12.2022 PASSED
BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UTTARA
KANNADA, KARWAR IN CRL.APPEAL NO. 45/2017 AND
CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN C.C.NO.
935/2014 ON THE FILE JMFC BHATKAL DATED 11.09.2017 FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/SECTIONS 143, 147, 447, 448, 341, 323,
324, 326, 506 AND 427 R/W. 149 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(2)(a) OF
THE PREVENTION OF DAMAGE TO PUBLIC PROPERLY ACT, 1984 IN
SO FAR AS ACCUSED NOS. 6, 7 AND 8 IS CONCERN.
IN CRL.RP.NO.100129/2023:
BETWEEN:
SURFRAZ S/O. ABDUL MUNAF,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC.
R/O. BADRIYA COLONY, TAGARGOD JALI,
TQ. BHATKAL, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA-581320.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI VENKATESH M. KHARVI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BHATKAL RURAL POLICE,
R/BY. S.P.P. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 397
R/W. 401 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS
ON THE FILE OF LEARNED JMFC BHATKAL IN C.C.NO. 227/2015
DATED 11.09.2017 AND ORDER PASSED IN CRL. APPEAL NO.
50/2017 PASSED BY II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE
UTTARA KANNADA, KARWAR DATED 22.12.2022 AND ALLOW THIS
PETITION BY SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT DATED 22.12.2022 PASSED
BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UTTARA
KANNADA, KARWAR IN CRL.APPEAL NO. 50/2017, AND
CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN C.C.NO.
227/2015 ON THE FILE JMFC BHATKAL DATED 11.09.2017 FOR THE
OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/SECTIONS 143, 147, 447, 448, 341, 323,
324, 326, 506 AND R/W. 149 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(2)(a) OF THE
PREVENTION OF DAMAGE TO PUBLIC PROPERLY ACT, 1984 IN SO
FAR AS ACCUSED NO. 3 IS CONCERN.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
CRL.RP No. 100124 of 2023
C/W CRL.RP No. 100127 of 2023
CRL.RP No. 100128 of 2023
AND 1 OTHER
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)
1. Heard Sri.Venkatesh M. Kharvi, learned counsel
for the revision petitioners and Sri.Praveena
Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader
for respondent-State.
2. In all these petitions, the revision petitioners
are the accused before the trial court who suffered an
order of conviction in CC No.935/2014 and sentenced as
under:
"In the present case as the prosecution has
proved the guilt of the accused No. 1, 2, 4, 5,
6, 7 and 8 beyond reasonable doubt,
considering the factual circumstances of the
case and in the interest of justice, accused No.
1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are hereby fined
Rs.1,000/- each, for the offence punishable
U/sec. 143 of IPC. In case accused No.1, 2, 4,
5, 6, 7 and 8 commit default in paying the fine
amount they shall undergo simple
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
imprisonment for 2 months each. Acting under
Sec.357 of Cr.P.C, it is hereby directed that out
of the fine amount imposed on Accused No.1,
2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 Rs.5,000/- shall be paid to
the complainant as compensation and
remaining fine amount shall be defrayed to the
state.
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are hereby
fined Rs.2,000/- each, for the offence
punishable U/sec.147 of IPC. In case accused
No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 commit default in
paying the fine amount they shall undergo
simple imprisonment for 4 months. Acting
under Sec.357 of Cr.P.C, it is hereby directed
that out of the fine amount imposed on
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 Rs.10,000/-
shall be paid to the complainant as
compensation and remaining fine amount shall
be defrayed to the state.
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are hereby
fined Rs.500/- each, for the offence punishable
U/sec.447 of IPC. In case accused No.1, 2, 4,
5, 6, 7 and 8 commit default in paying the fine
amount they shall undergo simple
imprisonment for 1 month. Acting under
Sec.357 of Cr.P.C, it is hereby directed that out
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
of the fine amount imposed on Accused No.1,
2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 Rs.2,000/- shall be paid to
the complainant as compensation and
remaining fine amount shall be defrayed to the
state.
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are hereby
fined Rs.1,000/- each, for the offence
punishable U/sec.448 of IPC. In case accused
No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 commit default in
paying the fine amount they shall undergo
simple imprisonment for 2 months. Acting
under Sec.357 of Cr.P.C, it is hereby directed
that out of the fine amount imposed on
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 Rs.5,000/-
shall be paid to the complainant as
compensation and remaining fine amount shall
be defrayed to the state.
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are hereby
fined Rs.500/- each, for the offence punishable
U/sec.341 of IPC. In case accused No.1, 2, 4,
5, 6, 7 and 8 commit default in paying the fine
amount they shall undergo simple
imprisonment for 1 month. Acting under
Sec.357 of Cr.P.C, it is hereby directed that out
of the fine amount imposed on Accused No.1,
2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 Rs.2,000/- shall be paid to
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
P.W.4-Satish Naik as compensation and
remaining fine amount shall be defrayed to the
state.
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are hereby
fined Rs.1,000/- each, for the offence JU
Punishable U/sec.323 of IPC. In case accused
No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 commit default in
paying the fine amount they shall undergo
simple imprisonment for two months. Acting
under Sec.357 of Cr.P.C, it is hereby directed
that out of the fine amount imposed on
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 Rs.5,000/-
shall be paid to the complainant as
compensation and remaining fine amount shall
be defrayed to the state.
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are hereby
fined Rs.6,000/- each, for the offence
punishable U/sec.324 of IPC. In case accused
No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 commit default in
paying the fine amount they shall undergo
simple imprisonment for one year. Acting under
Sec.357 of Cr.P.C, it is hereby directed that out
of the fine amount imposed on Accused No.1,
2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 Rs.25,000/- shall be paid to
the complainant as compensation and
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
remaining fine amount shall be defrayed to the
state.
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are hereby
punished with rigorous imprisonment for a
term of 3 years each for the offence punishable
under Sec.326 of IPC and also fined of
Rs.8,000/- each, for the offence punishable
U/sec. 326 of IPC. In case accused No.1, 2, 4,
5, 6, 7 and 8 commit default in paying the fine
amount they shall undergo simple
imprisonment for one year and two months.
Acting under Sec. 357 of Cr.P.C, it is hereby
directed that out of the fine amount imposed
Rs.40,000/- shall be paid to the complainant as
compensation and remaining fine amount shall
be defrayed to the state.
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are hereby
fined Rs.1,000/- each, for the offence
punishable U/sec.427 of IPC. In case accused
No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 commit default in
paying the fine amount they shall undergo
simple imprisonment for 2 months. Acting
under Sec.357 of Cr.P.C, it is hereby directed
that out of the fine amount imposed on
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 Rs.5,000/-
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
shall be paid to the HESCOM, BHATKAL as
compensation and remaining fine amount shall
be defrayed to the state.
Accused No.1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are hereby
punished with rigorous imprisonment for a
term of 3 years each for the offence punishable
under Sec.3 (2) (a) of The Prevention of
Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and also
fined of Rs.8,000/- each. In case accused No.1,
2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 commit default in paying the
fine amount they shall undergo simple
imprisonment for one year and two months.
Acting under Sec.357 of Cr.P.C, it is hereby
directed that out of the fine amount imposed
Rs.40,000/-shall be paid to the HESCOM,
BHATKAL as compensation and remaining fine
amount shall be defrayed to the state.
All the punishments of imprisonment shall
run concurrently.
Bail bond and surety bond of accused No.1,
2, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 shall stand cancelled."
3. The revision petitioners challenged the validity
of the order of conviction and sentence before the First
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
Appellate Court in Crl.A.Nos.45/2017, 48/2017, 49/2017
and 50/2017.
4. Learned judge in the first appellate Court after
securing the records heard the arguments of the parties in
detail and by considered judgment dated 22.12.2022
confirmed the order of conviction and sentence.
5. Being aggrieved by the same, accused persons
are before this Court as revision petitioners.
6. Essential factual matrix for disposal of the
revision petitions are as under:
7. An ugly incident occurred on 25.09.2013 at
about 8:45 P.M., in the restricted area belonging to
HESCOM situated at Hebal village, Bhatkal Taluka. In the
said incident, all the revision petitioners formed an
unlawful assembly and in furtherance of the common
object, they gained entry inside the said restricted area,
on the ground that because of the negligence of the
officials of HESCOM, Kumari Nazima died due to
electrocution at Firdos nagar at about 6:35 PM and picked
up the quarrel with the officials of HESCOM.
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
8. They restrained the free movement of CW.4
and they assaulted the complainant with clubs. They have
caused damages to the property belonging to HESCOM by
ransacking the office. They also threatened CW.4 with dire
consequences and thereby committed the offence of
trespass, restraining of free movement of the Government
of Officials and discharging their duty. As a result, there
were injuries sustained by the complainant and the CW.4.
9. Based on the complaint, a complaint came to be
registered with Bhatkal Police against the revision
petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 143,
147, 447, 448, 341, 323, 324, 326, 427, 506 read with
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC')
and Section 3(2)(a) of Prevention of Damage to the Public
Property 1984.
10. After thorough investigation, Police have filed
charge sheet interalia arrested the accused persons.
11. On receipt charge sheet, learned trial
Magistrate took cognizance and secured the presence of
accused persons and framed the charges.
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
12. Accused persons pleaded not guilty. Therefore,
trial was held.
13. In order to prove the case of the prosecution in
all 9 witnesses were examined comprising of complainant
injured witness, spot mahazar witnesses, doctor who
issued the wound certificate of the injured and the
Investigation Agency and placed on record 20 documents
which were exhibited and marked as Exs.P.1 to 20 and
also 3 material objects namely club, stone, piece of leg of
a fibre chair as M.O.Nos.1 to 3.
14. On conclusion of the recording of evidence,
learned trial Judge proceeded to examine the accused
persons and recorded their statements as is contemplated
under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for
short, 'the Cr.P.C.').
15. All the accused persons denied the incriminating
materials but failed to place any written submission on
record as is contemplated under Section 313(4) of the
Cr.P.C. nor placed any defence evidence.
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
16. Thereafter, learned trial Magistrate heard the
parties in detail and on cumulative consideration of oral
and documentary evidence placed on record, convicted the
accused for the aforesaid offences and sentenced them as
referred to supra.
17. Being aggrieved by the same, accused persons
filed an appeal before the District Court in
Crl.A.Nos.45/2017, 48/2017, 49/2017 and 50/2017.
18. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court while
maintaining the order of conviction of the accused
persons, modified the sentence of imprisonment from 2
years to 8 months.
19. Being further aggrieved by the same, accused
persons are before this Court.
20. Sri.Venkatesh M. Kharvi, learned counsel for
the revision petitioners reiterating the grounds urged in
the revision petitions vehemently contended that both the
Courts have not properly appreciated the material
evidence on record and wrongly convicted the accused
persons and sought for allowing the revision petitions.
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
21. He would further contend that genesis of the
crime is on account of the electrocuting a girl by name
Nazima on account of the negligence on the part of the
HESCOM officials. As such, the accused persons had been
to the office of the HESCOM in order to enquire about the
incident and at that juncture, on account of the
altercation, incident has occurred at spur of the moment.
Therefore, accused persons are not guilty of the aforesaid
offences and sought for allowing revision petitions.
22. Alternatively Sri.Venkatesh, M. Kharvi, would
contend that in the event this Court upholding the order of
conviction, taking note of the fact that all the revision
petitioners are eking out their livelihood by doing labour
work or driving the private vehicles, they have got families
to maintain and young children, this Court may consider
the case of the revision petitioners sympathetically and
treat the custody period already undergone by them as
the period of imprisonment for proved offences by
enhancing the fine amount reasonably and sought for
allowing the revision petitions.
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
23. Per contra, Sri.Praveena Devareddirayavara,
learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-
State supports the impugned order.
24. He would further contend that material on
record would be sufficient enough to hold that it is the
high handed action attributable to the accused which has
resulted in incident and sought for dismissal of the revision
petition
25. He would further contend that the photographs
produced on behalf of the prosecution marked place Ex.P.2
to 5 and the wound certificate issued by the doctor who
has been examined as PW.8 would sufficiently established
the nature of incident and high handed action on the part
of the accused persons.
26. Assuming that Kumari Nazima has died on
account of the negligence of the HESCOM Officials, neither
the complainant nor CW.4 is responsible for the same and
instead of taking action in accordance with law for the
negligence of HESCOM Officials, all the revision petitioners
have taken law in their own hands and have ransacked the
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
office of the HESCOM, resulting not only damage to public
property but also to the complainant and CW.4. Therefore,
the accused cannot be shown any lenience or mercy.
27. He would further contend that under the
Section 3(2)(a) of the Prevention of Damage to the Public
Property Act, there is a minimum punishment of 6 months
prescribed and rigorous imprisonment of 6 months and
therefore, the alternate submission are made on behalf of
the accused persons cannot be countenanced in law and
sought for dismissal of the revision petition in toto.
28. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this
Court perused the material on record meticulously. On
such perusal of material on record, following points would
arise for consideration:
i. Whether revision petitioners would make out the case
that the impugned judgments are suffering from legal
infirmities, perversity and thus sought for interference?
ii. Whether the sentence needs modification?
iii. What order?
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
REGARDING POINT NO.1:
29. In the case on hand, accused persons entering
into the restricted area of HESCOM Office and picking up
the quarrel with CW.4 and other Officials present in the
HESCOM Office on 25.09.2013 at 8.45 p.m., stands
established by placing necessary oral and documentary
evidence on record.
30. Admittedly, the accused persons have
ransacked the office of the HESCOM on the ground that
Kumari Nazima got electrocuted on account of the
negligence of the Officials HESCOM in Firdos Nagar at
about 6:35 p.m., on the same day. The action attributable
to the accused is depicted not only from the oral testimony
of the prosecution witnesses but also from the
photographs that has been placed on record which is not
in dispute. Material objects marked at M.O.Nos.1 to 3
substantially establish the case of the prosecution as well.
31. In the absence of previous enmity or animosity
why would the complainant foist a false case against the
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
accused persons is a question that remains unanswered on
behalf of the revision petitioners.
32. Material on record, the wound certificate issued
by PW.8 vide Ex.P.16 and discharge summary vide Ex.P.14
would sufficiently establish that injured has suffered
grievous injury. X-ray film is also made as part of the
Court record. No injured witness would falsely implicate
accused persons leaving aside the real culprit.
33. Further, there is no explanation offered by the
accused persons while recording the accused statement
insofar as the incident is concerned. Photographs marked
at Exs.P.2 to 5 would sufficiently corroborate the oral
testimony of the prosecution witnesses.
34. All these aspects of the matter have been
rightly appreciated by the learned trial Judge and re
appreciated by the learned Judge in the First Appellate
Court while recording an order of conviction.
35. Having regard to the limited power of the
rivisional jurisdiction, this Court is unable to agree with the
submissions made on behalf of the accused persons that
- 20 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
the conviction order is suffering from legal infirmity or
perversity. Therefore, Point No.1 needs to be answered in
negative.
REGARDING POINT NO.2:
36. Insofar as sentence is concerned, the trial
Judge has awarded 2 years imprisonment which has been
modified by the First Appellate Court for a period of eight
months. Taking note of the fact that incident has occurred
at the spur of the moment and also taking note of the fact
that the accused persons are eking out their livelihood by
doing coolie work and driving the private vehicles and they
have got families to maintain and young children are
dependent on their earning, custody period already
undergone by each of the accused, if treated as period of
imprisonment by enhancing the fine amount in a sum of
Rs.75,000/- payable by each of the accused persons
exclusively of fine amount already deposited before the
trial Court as per the orders of the trial Court and the First
Appellate Court in 3 installments commencing from
- 21 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
30.04.2025 in a sum of Rs.25,000/- each installment
would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, Point No.2 is
answered partly in the affirmative.
REGARDING POINT NO.3:
37. In view of the findings of this Court on points
Nos.1 and 2 as above, the following order is passed.
ORDER
(i) Criminal Revision Petitions are allowed in
part.
(ii) While maintaining the conviction of each of
the revision petitioners for the offences
punishable under Sections 143, 147, 447,
448, 341, 323, 324, 326, 427, 506 read with
Section 149 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(a)
of Prevention of Damage to the Public
Property 1984, the sentence of
imprisonment ordered by trial Magistrate
modified by the First Appellate Court is
further modified by directing the period of
judicial custody already undergone by the
each of the revision petitioners is treated as
- 22 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
period of imprisonment by directing the each
of the revision petitioners to pay enhanced
fine amount of Rs.75,000/- (exclusive of fine
amount) already imposed by trial Magistrate
confirmed by the First Appellate Court in 3
installments commencing from 30.04.2025
in sum of Rs.25,000/- and 30.05.2025 in a
sum of Rs.25,000/- and last installment on
30.06.2025 in a sum of Rs.25,000/- and
remaining period of sentence stand set
aside.
(iii) Failure to pay the enhanced fine amount of
Rs.75,000/- the order of the trial Magistrate
modified by the First Appellate Court stands
restored automatically.
(iv) After the receipt of the enhanced fine
amount in a sum of Rs.50,000/- is order to
be paid as compensation to injured PW.1
under due identification. Sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- is order to be paid as
compensation to the HESCOM office which is
exclusive of the compensation and damages
already ordered by the trail Magistrate and
confirmed by the First Appellate Court.
- 23 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4958
AND 1 OTHER
(v) Office to return the Trial Court records along
with a copy of this order for issuance of
modified conviction warrant.
SD/-
(V.SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE
AC
CT:PA
