MALLAPPA vs BASAYYA SWAMY
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 15 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200174 OF 2026
(372(Cr.PC)/413(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
MALLAPPA S/O BASAVARAJ NIRATTIGI,
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. NILHALLI, TQ. AND DIST. YADGIR-585201.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. BASAYYA SWAMY S/O TRIPURANTAYYA SWAMY,
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
2. SHARANAYYA SWAMY S/O TRIPURANTAYYA SWAMY,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
3. ERAYYA @ VEERAYYA SWAMY
S/O CHANNAYYA SWAMY,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE.
4. SADANAND S/O BASAYYA SWAMY,
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE.
Digitally signed
by B NAGAVENI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
5. PRADEEP S/O BASAYYA SWAMY,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE.
6. GURUSWAMY S/O BANNAYYA SWAMY,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
ALL ARE R/O. NEELHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. YADGIR-585201.
7. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY SAIDAPUR POLICE STATION,
TQ. AND DIST. YADGIRI-585201,
REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SANTOSH PATIL, APPOINTED AS
AMICUS CURIA FOR R1 TO R6;
SRI ANILKUMAR NAVADAGI, ADDL.SPP FOR R7)
THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 413 OF BNSS
(372 OF CR.PC) PRAYING TO
A) THAT APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE ALLOWED BY SETTING ASIDE
THE JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL PASSED BY THE DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, YADGIR IN SESSIONS CASE NO.30/2016
DATED 22.03.2025 ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENT / ACCUSED
FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147,
148, 341, 324, 326, 307, 504 R/W 149 OF IPC.
B) ANY OTHER JUST AND EQUITABLE ORDERS AS THIS
HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER MAY BE PASSED.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)
1. This appeal is filed by the de facto complainant under
Section 413 of BNSS 2023 (372 of CrPC) challenging
the judgment and order of acquittal dated
22.03.2025 in S.C. No.30 of 2016 by the learned
District and Sessions Judge, Yadgiri (for short, ‘ the
Trial Court ’) for offences punishable under Sections
143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 326, 307, 504 read with
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are
as follows:
3.
The case of the prosecution is that there is a space
belonging to Mutt. The said space is a public space.
One Bassayya Swamy and his 4-5 family members
since for the last one year were saying that they are
intending to construct their houses in the said open
space belong to Mutt, but the villagers of Neelahalli
Village were objecting for the same. Basayya Swamy
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
and others were saying that one day they will
construct their houses in the said place belonging to
the Mutt. On 27.06.2015, accused No.1 and his
brother’s son were marking in the said place
belonging to the Mutt so as to put up the
construction. Therefore, the complainant and the
villagers went and informed the said Basssayya
Swamy not to put up any construction in the place
belonging to the Mutt. In spite of it, they expressed
their intention to put up a construction over the said
place.
4. The complainant and others have approached the
Saidapur Police to lodge a complaint against one
Bassayya Swamy and others. Basayya and others
also approached the Saidapur Police Station.
However, the village elders came there and
expressed their intention to settle the matter in the
village itself.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
5. The complainant, one Bassappa Shaiksindi,
Shankaragouda Police Gouda, and other villagers had
returned to village. When they were returning back
to the village, near the statue of Jagjeevanrao, at
about 07:30 p.m., accused Nos.1 to 6 came over
there by arming with axe and sticks and abused
them in a filthy language and expressed their
intention to kill them and they assaulted on the head
of the complainant with axe and stick and also over
the body. The accused persons have also assaulted
on the head of Bassappa Shaiksindi and
Shankaragouda Police gouda came for rescue, but
the accused persons have assaulted on both hands,
head and body of the said Shankar Gouda Police
Gouda with the stick. One eddyappa Shaiksindi,
Basavaraj Shaiksindhi and Basavarj Hoogar, came
and pacified the quarrel and all the accused left the
spot by causing life threat to them and thereby
committed the aforesaid offences.
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
6. On the basis of the information given by the
complainant, Saidapur Police registered a case in
Crime No.105 of 2015 and took up the investigation
and visited the spot, drawn the panchanama and
seized the articles and after securing the wound
certificate of the injured and recorded the statement
of the witnesses and filed the charge sheet against
the accused.
7. On submission of the charge sheet, learned
Magistrate took cognizance of the offences against
the respondents/accused and registered a case in CC
No.112 of 2016. After complying the provisions of
Section 207 of CrPC, the learned Magistrate
committed the case on 26.02.2016 to the Sessions
Court for trial.
8. On the receipt of the entire committal records, a case
is registered as SC No.30 of 2016.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
9. The Trial Court framed the charge and the charge
was read over to the accused. The accused pleaded
not guilty and claimed to be tried.
10. The prosecution in order to prove its case examined
16 witnesses as PW1 to PW16 and marked 14
documents as Exhibits P1 to P14 and MO Nos.1 to 10
and closed the side.
11. The accused examined under Section 313 of CrPC, to
which he has denied the incriminating evidence
forthcoming against them in the evidence of the
prosecution. The accused did not lead either oral or
documentary evidence.
12. The Trial Court framed the following points for
consideration:
1) Whether the prosecution proved
beyond all reasonable doubt that
there is a space belong to Math and
the said space is a public space and
one Bassayya Swamy and his 4–5
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
family members since for the last
one year were saying that they are
intending to construct their houses
in the said open space belong to
Math, but the villagers of Neelahalli
village were objecting for the same
and the said Bassayya Swamy and
others were saying that one day
they will construct their houses in
the said place belong to Math and
on 27-6-2015 accused No.1 and his
brother’s son were marking in the
said place belong to Math so as to
put up the construction and
therefore the complainant and the
villagers went and informed the said
Bassayya Swamy to not to put up
any construction in the said place
and in-spite of it, they expressed
their intention to put up the
construction over the said place and
the complainant and others have
approached the Saidapur police and
the said Bassayya Swamy and
others had also approached the
Saidapur police and but the village
elders came there and expressed
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
their intention to settle the matter in
the village itself and therefore the
complainant and one Bassappa
Shaiksindi, Shankargouda Police
Gouda and other villagers have
returned back to village and when
they were returning back to the
village near the statue of
Jagjeevanrao at about 7-30 p.m, all
the accused came over there by
forming into an unlawful assembly
with intention to commit crime and
thereby accused have committed an
offence punishable U/Sec.143 of
IPC?
2) Whether the prosecution proved
beyond reasonable doubt that on
the above said date, time, place and
circumstances, all the accused were
members of an unlawful assembly
and in prosecution of said common
object of such assembly, committed
the offence of rioting on them and
others and thereby accused have
committed an offence punishable
U/Sec.147 of IPC?
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
3) Whether the prosecution further
proved beyond all reasonable doubt
that on the above said date, time
and place, all the accused persons in
furtherance of their common object
committed rioting on them and
others armed with deadly weapons
like club and axe in their hands and
thereby committed an offence
punishable under Sec.148 of IPC?
4) Whether the prosecution further
proved beyond all reasonable doubt
that on the above said date, time
and place, all the accused persons in
furtherance of their common object
came and wrongfully restrained
them and thereby committed an
offence punishable under Section
341 R/w Section 149 of Indian Penal
Code?
5) Whether the prosecution further
proved beyond all reasonable doubt
that on the above said date, time
and place, all the accused persons in
furtherance of their common object,
accused No.3 and 4 have assaulted
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
CW.1 with club on his head and
right shoulder and caused hidden
injury and accused No.5 and 6 have
assaulted CW.9 with clubs to his
right elbow and caused hidden
injury and thereby committed an
offence punishable under Sec.324
R/w Section 149 of IPC?
6) Whether the prosecution further
proved beyond all reasonable doubt
that on the above said date, time
and place, all the accused persons in
furtherance of their common object,
accused No.1 and 2 assaulted CW.1
with axe on his head and also CW.9
head and caused bleeding injury to
them and thereby committed an
offence punishable under Sec.326
R/w Section 149 of IPC?
7) Whether the prosecution further
proved beyond all reasonable doubt
that on the above said date, time
and place, all the accused persons in
furtherance of their common object,
accused No.1 & 2 came with
intention to kill them and assaulted
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
CW.1 with axe on his head and also
CW.9 head and caused bleeding
injury and thereby committed an
offence punishable under Sec.307
R/w Section 149 of IPC?
8) Whether the prosecution further
proved beyond all reasonable doubt
that on the above said date, time
and place, all the accused persons in
furtherance of their common object
and intentionally insulted the said
them by abusing him in filthy
language and thereby gave
provocation to them intending or
knowing it to be likely that such
provocation will cause them to break
the public peace, or to commit any
other offence and thereby accused
have committed an offence
punishable U/s.504 R/w Section 149
of IPC?
9) What order?”
13. The Trial Court after appreciating the entire evidence
on record answered point Nos.1 to 8 in the Negative;
point No.9 as per the final order. The Trial Court
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
acquitted the accused for the above-said offences
vide judgment dated 22.03.2025.
14. The complainant aggrieved by the judgment and
order of acquittal dated 22.03.2025 passed in S.C.
No.30 of 2016 by the learned District and Sessions
Judge, Yadgiri, filed this appeal under Section 413 of
BNSS, 2023.
15. Learned counsel for the complainant/appellant
submits that the Trial Court has committed a grave
error in law in accepting the minor contradictions in
the evidence of the prosecution which are not fatal,
thereby landed in miscarriage of justice. He submits
that there are grievous injuries caused on the vital
parts of the body of CW1-Mallappa, CW10-
Shankargouda and CW11-Bannappa and they were
admitted in the hospital as in-patients and got
treatment for more than 15 days to 2 months, and
they have also given evidence before the Trial Court
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
regarding the incident and assault by the accused,
which the Trial Court has not considered.
16. He also submits that the judgment passed by the
Trial Court is perverse and arbitrary. He also submits
that there is a counter case registered in Crime
No.106 of 2015 against the complainant which is
pending for trial before the Trial Court. The said
aspect was not considered by the Trial Court and
committed an error in passing the impugned
judgment. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to
allow the appeal.
17. Per contra, learned amicus curiae appearing for the
respondents-accused submits that there is no case
and counter-case as alleged by the learned counsel
for the complainant. He submits that a case has been
registered against the complainant on the next day
and that there are several civil and criminal cases
pending against the complainant in the Civil Court
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
and as well as the Criminal Court in regard to the
property standing in the name of accused. He
submits that the civil dispute has given the colour of
assault and has turned into a criminal case. He
submits that the judicial scope of review in a case of
order of acquittal is very narrow and to buttress his
arguments, he has placed reliance on the judgment
of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
1
Jafarudheen v. State of Kerala . Hence, on these
grounds, he prays to dismiss the appeal.
18. Learned Additional SPP supported the complainant
and he submits that the prosecution has proved the
case beyond reasonable doubts. However, the Trial
Court has not properly appreciated the entire
evidence on record and committed an error in
passing the impugned judgment and order of
1
(2022) 8 SCC 440
- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
acquittal. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow
the appeal.
19. Perused the records and considered the submissions
of the learned counsel for the parties.
20. The point that would arise for our consideration is:
“Whether the complainant /
appellant proves that the
judgment and order of acquittal
passed by the Trial Court is
arbitrary, erroneous and
without appreciation of
evidence?”
Reg. Point for consideration:
21. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined
PW1-Mallappa (CW1), who has stated that he knows
CW2 to CW11; There is a mutt near Hanuman
Temple in Neelahalli village; About 2 years ago, at
07:30 p.m., in relation to the property of the mutt,
there was a quarrel, as the accused wanted to
construct a house in that area; when the complainant
- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
told not to put up the construction of the house, they
told that they will construct the house; Thereafter,
they informed Saidapur Police Station; on the same
day at 07:30 p.m., the accused by holding axe and
club scolded and thereby rioted and also told that
they will kill; Accused No.1 assaulted with the axe to
the head; accused No.2 assaulted with the club to
the hand; he has sustained bleeding injuries;
accused No.3 assaulted with the axe to the back and
head of Bannappa; accused No.4 assaulted with the
club to Shankargouda and Bannappa was not in a
position to speak. Hence, they lodged a complaint;
Some of the villagers have pacified the issue; they
gave a complaint and the said complaint is marked
as Exhibit P1 and he had identified 6 material objects
(MOs) marked as MO-1 to MO-6 and his clothes were
blood stained and he had identified MO-7 to MO-10.
22. During cross-examination, it is elicited that there are
four civil matters pending and that the mutt is not in
- 18 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
use from 1994-95; he admits that he is an accused
in Crime No.34 of 2014 and a photograph was
confronted to him and he admits the contents of the
photograph and the said photograph is marked as
Exhibit D1. He admits that the property is standing in
the name of accused in Panchayath records.
23. The prosecution examined Shekhappa as PW2, who
is a pancha to Exhibit P2 and he identified MO-1 to
MO4. The panchanama is marked as Exhibit P2.
During cross-examination, he admits that he does
not know the contents of the complaint and he is
aware of signing the documents. It is also elicited
that the police have not taken the photographs.
24. The prosecution examined PW3-Basalingappa. He is
also a panch witness to Exhibit P2 and identified MO-
1 to MO-4. He also admits that the accused filed a
criminal case against his brothers and he is not
aware of the contents of the complaint.
- 19 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
25. The prosecution examined PW4-Reddeppa. He has
deposed that there was a quarrel in relation to the
property of a mutt between the complainant and the
accused. The accused came to put up a foundation
and the villagers did not allow them to put up a
construction/foundation. The accused-persons
assaulted the complainant. It is elicited that accused
No.1 has lodged 3 to 4 cases against him.
26. The prosecution examined one Basavaraj as PW5. He
has deposed that he does not know CW6, CW8 to
CW11. He has deposed that on 27.06.2015, the
accused came to put up a foundation in the property
which belongs to Mutt. The public went and
questioned the accused and told the accused that it
is a mutt property and it does not belong to them
and thereafter, they went to Saidapur Police Station
and lodged a complaint and he identified MO-1 to
MO-6.
- 20 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
27. During cross-examination, it is elicited that he has
studied up to VII standard and the accused
constructed a house about 30 years back and he
admits that there are civil cases pending and he has
not given any statement in that cases and he admits
that there is a hotel belonging to him in front of the
temple. There is a provisional store belonging to the
accused; when they came back it was 07:30 p.m.
28. The prosecution examined Shankargouda as PW6.
He has deposed on par with the other prosecution
witnesses. During cross-examination, it is elicited
that he was not aware as to what happened in
Saidapur.
29. The prosecution examined one Basappa as PW7, who
has also deposed on par with the other prosecution
witnesses. During cross-examination, he admitted
that there are four criminal cases pending against
- 21 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
him and he attends the Court. He is not aware as to
what happened on the day from morning till evening.
30. The prosecution examined one Nagareddy as PW8.
He is a witness to seizure mahazar, and the said
mahazar is marked as Exhibit P3, and another
Mahazar is drawn as per Exhibit P9. However, the
said witness turned hostile to the case of the
prosecution.
31. The prosecution examined one Basavaraj as PW9.
He is another witness to Exhibits P3 and P9. Even
the said witness turned hostile to the case of the
prosecution.
32. The prosecution examined one Dharmaraj as PW10,
who is a witness to Mahazar, which is marked as
Exhibit P5, and he is not aware about the contents of
Exhibit P5.
- 22 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
33. The prosecution examined in Siddappagouda as
PW11, who has prepared the sketch at the spot, and
same is marked as Exhibit P6.
34. The prosecution examined one Vasanthkumar Jadav
as PW12, who has issued the certificate that there
was electricity supply to the house.
35. PW13-Siddanna is another witness examined by the
prosecution, who has deposed that on the instruction
of PSI, he had recorded the statement of
Shankargouda in Basaveshwara Hospital and handed
over the statement to the Investigating Officer.
36. PW14-Arjunappa has stated that on 04.07.2015, on
the instruction of PSI, he went to Hyderabad Nikhil
Hospital and recorded the statement of the injured
Bannappa and handed over the same to the
Investigating Officer. It is elicited that he has not
taken the permission from the doctor while recording
the alleged statement of Bannappa; He had not
- 23 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
received any document that Bannappa was admitted
in Hyderabad Nikhil Hospital and that he has not
noted the inpatient number in the statement.
37. The prosecution examined Lakkappa as PW15, who
took up the investigation from CW22 and recorded
the further statement of the victim and
Basalingappa. He went to the spot and prepared a
mahazar as per Exhibit P5 and seized MO7 to MO10
on 06.08.2015. He submitted the charge-sheet.
38. The prosecution examined Dr. Basanagouda Patil as
PW16, who has examined one Shankargouda and
issued the wound certificate as per Exhibit P12. He
also examined Mallappa and issued the wound
certificate as per Exhibit P8. He also examined
Bannappa.
39. From the perusal of the entire evidence on record, it
is evident that there are several civil and criminal
cases pending in between the accused persons and
- 24 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
the complainant. The accused have also lodged a
complaint against the complainant before Saidapur
Police on the 28.06.2015.
40. Admittedly, the property in question is standing in
the name of accused persons and they wanted to
construct a building in the said property. One of the
witnesses has admitted during the cross-examination
that the accused constructed the house about 30
years ago. A Swamiji was there in the mutt,
howeversaid Swamiji did not demand the accused to
leave the mutt property.
41. The accused persons have constructed a house about
30 years ago, as such, the question of constructing a
house on the property in question does not arise.
Since there are several civil and criminal cases
pending in between the parties to the proceedings,
that is the motive behind the complainant lodging
the instant complaint against the accused persons.
- 25 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
42. PW4 and PW5 are the injured witnesses. But the
accused have also lodged a complaint against PW4
and PW5 and still there are 3 to 4 cases pending
against them. Further, the panchas have not
supported the case of the prosecution.
43. The Trial Court considering the entire evidence on
record has held that the prosecution has failed to
prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable
doubt and has rightly passed the impugned judgment
and order of acquittal.
44. It is a settled principle of law that when the trial
Court has come to the conclusion that the evidence
of the injured witnesses, having sufficient reason to
have a grudge against the accused in connection with
the civil dispute, it is not sufficient enough to base
the guilt of the accused, it would not be proper for
the Appellate Court to interfere with the case. It is
also relevant to note that the accused will have a
- 26 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
presumption of innocence and it is for the
prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond
such reasonable doubt. When the accused have a
verdict of acquittal in their favour by the trial Court,
which had the advantage of seeing the demeanor of
the witnesses and the manner in which they deposed
before the Court, the presumption of innocence
against the accused gets fortified and as such, the
Appellate Court should be too cautious while
interfering in the same.
45. This principle has been laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in several of its decisions and a chronicle
of all those decisions has been reiterated and
referred to in a recent judgment in the case of Ravi
Sharma v. State (Government of NCT, Delhi)
2
and Another . Referring to the decision in the case
2
(2022) 8 SCC 536
- 27 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
3
of Jafarudheen v. State of Kerala , it was held, at
paragraph 8, as below:
" 8. Before venturing into the merits of
the case, we would like to reiterate the
scope of Section 378 of the Criminal
Procedure Code (for short “CrPC”) while
deciding an appeal by the High Court, as
the position of law is rather settled. We
would like to quote the relevant portion of
a recent judgment of this Court in
Jafarudheen v. State of Kerala [(2022)
8 SCC 440] as follows : (SCC p. 454, para
25)
“ 25 . While dealing with an
appeal against acquittal by
invoking Section 378 CrPC, the
appellate court has to consider
whether the trial court's view can
be termed as a possible one,
particularly when evidence on
record has been analysed. The
reason is that an order of
acquittal adds up to the
presumption of innocence in
3
(2022) 8 SCC 440
- 28 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
favour of the accused. Thus, the
appellate court has to be
relatively slow in reversing the
order of the trial court rendering
acquittal. Therefore, the
presumption in favour of the
accused does not get weakened
but only strengthened. Such a
double presumption that enures
in favour of the accused has to
be disturbed only by thorough
scrutiny on the accepted legal
parameters.”
46. Further, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
Shailesh Kumar Singh @ Shailesh R.Singh v.
4
State of Uttar Pradesh and others , deprecated
the practice of using criminal proceedings as a
substitute for civil remedies.
47. In view of the above discussion, we answer the point
for consideration in negative .
48. In the result, we proceed to pass the following order:
4
2025 LiveLaw (SC) 726
- 29 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11403-DB
CRL.A No. 200174 of 2026
CNR: KAHC030048062026
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Appeal is
dismissed .
(ii) The impugned judgment and
order of acquittal dated
22.03.2025 in S.C. No.30 of
2016 by the learned District and
Sessions Judge, Yadgiri are
hereby confirmed ;
(iii) The High Court Legal Services
Committee, Kalaburagi Bench, is
directed to pay a sum of
Rs.10,000/- as Honorarium to
Sri.Santosh Patil, learned
amicus curiae representing
respondent Nos.1 to 6.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO)
JUDGE
RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10
Ct:pk