2010 INSC 0179
Chikkegowda & Others
v.
State of Karnataka by K.R. Pet Police Station
(Supreme Court Of India)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. SUDERSHAN REDDY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR
Chikkegowda & Others v. State of Karnataka by K.R. Pet Police Station
Criminal Appeal No. 2500 Of 2009 | 10-02-2010

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22nd July, 2008 in Criminal appeal
No.751 of 2002 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore, whereby the High Court
reversed the order of acquittal dated 24.11.2001 passed by the J.M.F.C. in CC No.658 of 1996
acquitting the appellants for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 326, 324,
323 and 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'the IPC).

3. The High Court having set aside the order of acquittal convicted all the appellants herein for the
offence punishable under Section 326 IPC, however, directed their release on probation on each one
of them executing a bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum. The appellant
were further directed to pay compensation in a sum of Rs.5,000/- each. Out of the fine amount, a
sum of Rs.30,000/- was directed to be paid to PW.1 the injured.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the High Court without recording any reasons
whatsoever, in a cryptic manner and even without noticing that there was no charge against the
appellants under Section 326 IPC, set aside the order passed by the Trial Court and convicted the
appellants under Section 326 IPC.

5. We find merit in this appeal since it is an admitted fact that the charge framed against the
appellants under Section 326 IPC has been dropped by the Trial Court. It is difficult to appreciate as
to how the High Court could have convicted the appellants herein for the offence punishable under
Section 326 IPC in the absence of any charge against them. The High Court failed to notice that the
charge under Section 326 IPC has been dropped against the appellants.

6. For the aforesaid reasons, we find it difficult to sustain the impugned order convicting the
appellants for the offence punishable under Section 326 IPC. The order of acquittal passed by the
Trial Court is restored and the impugned order is accordingly, set aside. The appellants are not
required to deposit any fine amount. The bail bonds executed by them for their release on probation
shall accordingly, stand cancelled.

                                           1  SpotLaw
7. This appeal is accordingly, allowed.

                                         2  SpotLaw