Karnataka High Court
Khajappa And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 September, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
CRL.A No. 200110 of 2023
C/W CRL.A No. 200170 of 2023
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G. UMA
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200110 OF 2023
(374(Cr.PC)/415(BNSS))
C/W.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200170 OF 2023
(374(Cr.PC)/415(BNSS))
AND
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.200174 OF 2023
(374(Cr.PC)/415(BNSS))
Digitally signed by
RAMESH IN CRL.A.NO.200110/2023:
MATHAPATI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BETWEEN:
GANGANNA
S/O HANAMANTH METRE,
AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
R/O. MADAN HIPPARGA VILLAGE,
TQ. ALAND,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585302.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI BASAVAKIRAN G.R., AMICUS CURIAE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
CRL.A No. 200110 of 2023
C/W CRL.A No. 200170 of 2023
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2023
HC-KAR
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH MADAN HIPPARGA P.S.,
TQ. ALAND
DIST. KALABURAGI,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH-585105.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI GOPALKRISHNA B. YADAV, HCGP, FOR R1;
SRI RAVINDRA H. BABALESHWAR, ADVOCATE, FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
374 (2) OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND
SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION
DATED 27.02.2023 AND ORDER OF SENTENCE 03.03.2023
DATED AND SET THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED AT LIBERTY.
IN CRL.A.NO. 200170/2023:
BETWEEN:
1. KHAJAPPA
S/O BHOGAPPA CHOWGULE,
AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE WORK.
2. BALAPPA
S/O BHOGAPPA CHOWGULE,
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE WORK.
3. LAXMAN
S/O BHOGAPPA CHOWGULE,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE WORK.
4. BHOGAPPA S/O YALLAPPA CHOWGULE,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
CRL.A No. 200110 of 2023
C/W CRL.A No. 200170 of 2023
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2023
HC-KAR
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE WORK.
5. SHANTABAI
W/O BHOGAPPA CHOWGULE,
AGE: 55 YEARS,
OCC: COOLIE & HOUSEHOULD,
ALL ARE R/O. MADAN HIPPARGA VILLAGE,
TQ. ALAND,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585 104.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI KHALEEPH M. BARMA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH MADAN HIPPARGA POLICE STATION,
TQ. & DIST. KALABURAGI,
REPRESENTED BY
ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI GOPALKRISHNA B. YADAV, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
374 (2) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF CONVICTION AND
SENTENCE DATED 27.02.2023 AND 03.03.2023 IN
S.C.NO.37/2017 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, KALABURAGI, AND TO PLEASED TO
ACQUIT THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 5.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
CRL.A No. 200110 of 2023
C/W CRL.A No. 200170 of 2023
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN CRL.A.NO. 200174/2023:
BETWEEN:
LAXMAN S/O VITHAL KULAKUTAGI,
AGE: 33 YEARS OCC: COOLIE WORK,
R/O. MADAN HIPPARGA VILLAGE,
TQ. ALAND
DIST. KALABURAGI- 585 236,
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MAHADEV S. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH MADAN HIPPARGA P.S.,
TQ. ALAND,
DIST.KALABURAGI,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH- 585 107.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI GOPALKRISHNA B. YADAV, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
374(2) OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND
SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION
DATED 27.02.2023 AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED
03.03.2023 AND SET THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED No.6 AT
LIBERTY.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
CRL.A No. 200110 of 2023
C/W CRL.A No. 200170 of 2023
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2023
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G. UMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G. UMA)
The appellant in Crl. A. No.200110/2023 being
accused No.7, the appellants in Crl.A. No.200170/2023
being accused Nos.1 to 5 and appellant in Crl.A.
No.200174/2023 being accused No.6 have preferred these
appeals being aggrieved by the impugned judgment of
conviction dated 27.02.2023 and order of sentence dated
02.03.2023 passed in S.C. No.37/2017 on the file of the II
Additional Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi, [for short 'Trial
Court'] convicting accused No.1 for the offence under
Sections 341, 506, 366, 504 and 306 of Indian Penal Code
[for short 'IPC'], while convicting accused Nos.2 to 7 for
the offence under Section 109 read with Section 149 of
IPC and sentencing them as under:
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
days simple imprisonment for the offence
punishable U/sec.341 of I.P.C.
Accused No.1 is further sentenced to undergo
six months simple imprisonment with fine of
Rs.1000/- for the offence punishable under Section
506 of IPC., if default of payment of fine, accused
shall undergo simple imprisonment of one month.
Accused No.1 is further sentenced to undergo
seven years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine
of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) for the
offence punishable under Section 366 of IPC. In
default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of one year.
The accused No.1 is further sentenced to
undergo one month simple imprisonment with fine
of Rs.1000/- for the offence punishable under
Section 504 of IPC., if default of payment of fine,
accused shall undergo simple imprisonment of 10
days.
The accused No.1 is further sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of
seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand only) for the offence
punishable under Section 306 of IPC. In default of
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
payment of fine, he shall undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of one year.
The accused Nos.2 to 7 are sentenced to
undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of
seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-
(Rupees Five Thousand only) each for the offence
punishable under Section 109 of IPC. In default of
payment of fine, they shall undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of one year.
All the sentences shall run concurrently."
2. Facts of the case in brief are that, PW1 being
the informant filed the first information as per Ex.P1
against accused Nos.1 to 7 alleging commission of the
above mentioned offences. On the basis of the FIR
investigation was undertaken and final report came to be
filed against these appellants. It is the contention of the
prosecution that, accused Nos.1 to 7 were the accused in
Crime No.31/2015 of Madana Hipparga Police Station for
the offence punishable under Section 143, 341, 506,
366A, 109, 376 read Section 149 of IPC and under
Sections 4, 5, 17 and 18 of the POCSO Act. On 11.01.2016
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
at 8.00 p.m., accused No.1 with an intention to escape
from being convicted in the said case, wrongfully
restrained the victim Laxmi now deceased, being the
daughter of the informant while she was returning back
after answering nature's call. He criminally intimidated to
cause her death and that of her family members and
insisted her to marry him and forcibly married her by
taking before the Registrar of Marriages at Chittapur on
12.01.2016 at 8.00 p.m. He also abused her in filthy
language provoking to cause breach of public peace,
committed rape on the intervening night of
26/27.02.2016, as a result of which, he abetted her to
commit suicide on the intervening night of 27.02.2016 in
her house. It is alleged that, accused Nos.2 to 7 in
furtherance of their common intention, abetted accused
No.1 in commission of the aforesaid offences. Therefore,
all the accused Nos.1 to 7 have committed the offence.
After filing the final report, learned Magistrate took
cognizance of the offence and committed the matter to
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
Sessions Court. The accused appeared before the Trial
Court, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
3. To prove the guilt of the accused, the
prosecution examined PWs.1 to 22, got marked Exs.P1 to
P68 in support of its contention. The accused have denied
all the incriminating materials available on record in their
statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and got examined
DWs.1 to 4 in support of their defence.
4. After taking into consideration all these
materials on record, the Trial Court came to the conclusion
that, the prosecution is successful in proving the guilt of
accused beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly passed
the impugned judgment of conviction and order of
sentence for the aforesaid offences stated above. Being
aggrieved by the same, appellants/accused Nos.1 to 7 are
before this Court.
5. Heard Sri Basavakiran G.R., learned Amicus
Curiae for appellant-accused No.7, Sri Khaleeph M. Barma,
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
learned counsel for the appellants-accused Nos.1 to 5, Sri
Mahadev S. Patil, learned counsel for the appellant-
accused No.6 and Sri Gopalkrishna B. Yadav, learned High
Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State
as well as Sri Ravindra H. Babaleshwar, learned counsel
for respondent No.2. Perused the materials including the
Trial Court records.
6. In view of the rival contentions urged by
learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would
arise for my consideration is:
"Whether the appellants-accused have
made out a case to interfere with the
impugned judgment of conviction and
order of sentence passed by the Trial
Court?
7. My answer to the above point is 'Partly in the
Affirmative' for the following:
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
REASONS
8. It is the contention of the prosecution that,
accused Nos.1 to 7 were the accused in Crime No.31/2015
of Madana Hipparga Police Station, registered for the
offences punishable under Section 143, 341, 506, 366A,
109, 376 read with Section 149 of IPC and under Sections
4, 5, 17 and 18 of the POCSO Act. In order to avoid
conviction in the said case and to force the victim from
deposing before the Court, accused No.1 wrongfully
restrained her on 11.01.2016 at 8.00 p.m., criminally
intimidated, forcibly married and committed rape on her.
Thereby, abetted her in commission of suicide. As a result
of which, the victim was forced to end her life by hanging
in her house on the intervened night of 26/27.02.2016.
9. It is stated that, accused Nos.2 to 7 in
furtherance of their common intention abetted accused
No.1 to commit the offence. In order to prove the guilt of
the accused, the prosecution examined PW.1-the
complainant who is father of deceased Laxmi. He has fully
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
supported the case of the prosecution by narrating the
incident in detail. PW.2-is the mother of the victim girl,
who has also fully supported and corroborated the
evidence of PW.1. PW.5-is the neighbor and he is the
pancha, who convened the panchayat and advised the
accused. This witness has also supported the case of the
prosecution.
10. PW.10-is the Sub-Registrar of Marriages, who
deposes about the marriage of accused No.1 with the
deceased on 12.01.2016 and registration of the same. He
speaks about Exs.P17 to 24 i.e., marriage certificate and
other relevant documents which are produced before him.
11. It is the specific contention of the prosecution
that, the deceased had left behind the death note as per
Ex.P2 in her own hand-writing and the same was seized
under the seizure mahazar and sent for hand writing
expert for his opinion. PW.22-is the Hand Writing expert,
who examined the questioned hand writings on Ex.P2 with
the standard writings of the deceased Laxmi and gave his
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
opinion as per Ex.P44, according to which, 'the person who
wrote the admitted writings marked as S1 to S18 also
wrote the questioned writing marked as Exs.Q1 and Q2'.
12. In Ex.P2-the death note, which is proved to be
the hand writing of the deceased, she refers to the names
of accused Nos.1 to 7 and expresses her anguish about
the acts committed by them and concluded that accused
Nos.1 to 7 named therein have caused injustice to her and
she is seeking justice. She also pleaded for justice while
being determined to commit suicide.
13. It is stated that, accused Nos.1 to 6 and others
were convicted in the said case. While only accused No.7
herein was acquitted. The cumulative effect of all these
materials on record unmistakenly goes to prove the
commission of offence by accused No.1 as alleged and
abetting of such offence by accused Nos.2 to 7. Therefore,
I am of the opinion that the prosecution is successful in
proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
14. At this stage, learned Amicus Curiae submits
that, the only allegations against accused Nos.2 to 7 is
that, they have abetted the commission of the offence by
accused No.1, and all these accused are having wife and
children. The incident had occurred during 2016.
Therefore, prays for showing leniency in favour of the
appellants, while sentencing them. The incident had
occurred during 2016 and 09 years have already lapsed.
15. It is noticed that major role is played by
accused No.1 in committing the offence, while accused
Nos.2 to 7 only abetted commission of such offence.
Hence, they cannot be equally sentenced. Therefore, I am
of the opinion that, some leniency is to be shown in favour
of the accused Nos.2 to 7 in the interest of justice, while
sentencing them.
16. I have gone through the impugned judgment
of conviction passed by the Trial Court, it has taken into
consideration all the materials on record and has arrived
at right conclusion. Hence, I do not find any reason to
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
interfere with the same. However, the order of sentence
passed by the Trial Court against accused Nos.2 to 7
needs to be modified.
17. Accordingly, I answer the above point partly
in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Appeals are allowed in part.
(ii) The impugned judgment of conviction passed
against accused Nos.1 to 7 and order of
sentence passed against in Sessions Case
No.37/2017, on the file of the learned II
Additional Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi,
convicting for the offence under Sections
341, 506, 366, 504 and 306 of IPC, is hereby
confirmed.
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
(iii) The order of sentence passed against accused
Nos.2 to 7 for the offence punishable under
Section 109 r/w Section 149 of IPC, is
modified as under:
(a) Accused Nos.2 to 7 are sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period
of 2 years with fine of Rs.10,000/-. In
default to pay, to undergo simple
imprisonment for six months for the offence
punishable under Section 109 r/w Section
149 of IPC.
(iv) Accused Nos.2 to 7, are entitled for the
benefit of set off against the sentence of
imprisonment for the period of detention
undergone by them, as provided under
Section 428 of Cr.P.C.
The fees of Amicus Curiae is fixed at Rs.10,000/-.
The learned Additional Registrar General is directed
to make necessary arrangements for payment of the fees
to the Amicus Curiae.
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5311
HC-KAR
Registry to send back the Trial Court Records along
with copy of this judgment for information and for needful
action.
Sd/-
(M.G. UMA)
JUDGE
SBS,MSR
CT:PK
