Muniraja v. State of Karnataka
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court allowed the criminal appeal in part. It extended the benefit of probation to appellants 1-9 who were convicted of offences under various sections of the IPC, directing them to deposit compensation. It set aside the conviction of appellant No.10, holding he was not present at the scene of the incident.
What did the court decide?
Appellants 1 to 9 granted probation for three years and directed to pay compensation of Rs.3,000/- each. Conviction of appellant No.10 set aside and he is acquitted.
What the court decided
1 Crl.A 1179/2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2015
- BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. PACHHAPURE
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1179 OF 2010
BETWEEN:
- MUNIRAJA S/O DODDAVENKATESHA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
- SRINIVASA S/O CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
- MUNIRAJA S/O CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
- SHIVAKUMAR @ KUMAR S/O CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
- RAJA @ HANSRAJA S/O MANI AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
- VENKATASWAMY S/O MINIVEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellants are entitled to the benefit of probation given the circumstances of the case and the sentencing of female co-accused.
Whether the conviction of appellant No.10 (accused No.19) who was not present at the scene at the relevant time should be maintained.
Whether compensation needs to be awarded to the injured victim despite granting probation.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Muniraja S/o Doddavenkatesha
- appellant
Srinivasa S/o Chandrappa
- appellant
Muniraja S/o Chandrappa
- appellant
Shivakumar @ Kumar S/o Chandrappa
- appellant
Raja @ Hansaraja S/o Mani
- appellant
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Karnataka HC
- Decided on
- · April
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRL.A/1179/2010
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court