Dismissed

Chandrappa Rayappa Itagi v. the State by Marihal of Police

Karnataka HC12 Feb 2021CRL.A/2695/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Appeal No.2695/2013, the High Court of Karnataka held that the appeal by an appellant who had already served his sentence and paid the fine was infructuous and was therefore dismissed without examining merits. The court directed the Registrar to verify records for similar cases.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed as infructuous due to the appellant having served the sentence and paid the fine.

Chandrappa Rayappa Itagi Vs the State by Marihal… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBURARY 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2695/2013

¶6

BETWEEN :

¶7

CHANDRAPPA RAYAPPA ITAGI, AGE-50 YEARS, OCC-AGRICULTURE, R/O.MAVINAKATTI, TQ-DIST-BELGAUM.

¶8

…..APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI S.B.DEYANNAVAR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND :

¶11

THE STATE-BY MARIHAL POLICE, R/BY SPP DHARWAD.

¶12

……RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI RAMESH B.CHIGARI, HCGP)

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF CR.P.C. AND PRAYED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER OF SENTENCE DATED 16.04.2013 PASSED BY THE V ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, BELGAUM IN SESSIONS CASE NO.107/2010 AND ORDER THE ACQUITTAL OF THE APPELLANT HEREIN IN THE CHARGES LEVELED AGAINST HIM IN THE ABOVE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶15

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL DISPOSAL THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the appellant-accused and learned HCGP for respondent-State.

¶19

The learned HCGP submits appeal become infractuous as the accused already undergone sentence and released from Jail almost 4 years back and he has not hosen to prosecute the appeal, hence prayed for dismissing the appeal as having become infractuous.

¶20

The learned counsel for the appellant also admits the accused released long back and he has approached him inspite of lapse of 4 years.

¶21

Report dated 12.02.2021 received from the Jail Authority (Central Prison, Hindalaga, Belagavi) through learned HCGP with the annexure showing the period of imprisonment undergone by the appellant/accused and the remission given to the accused by the State. The accused was arrested in this case on 07.01.2010 and the trial Court convicted and sentenced him on 16.02.2013. He was in Judicial Custody throughout trial and subsequently he has

¶22

¶23

preferred an appeal before this Court in the year 2013 and I.A.No.1/2014 for suspension of sentence filed by the accused has been dismissed on 19.10.2020 as not pressed. Therefore, this matter came up before this Court for final hearing. On verifying with the Jail Authority, it is revealed that the accused already released from the Jail by serving the sentence and making the payment of `30,000/- as fine before the trial Court as per the receipt dated 13.02.2017. The order sheet of the trial Court reveals the fine amount has been deposited by the accused before the trial Court and he has been undergone sentence and released by the Jail Authority on 16.02.2017, 4 years have been lapsed. Considering this aspect, the appeal become infractuous, it is not necessary to consider the appeal on merits.

¶24

Therefore, appeal is dismissed having become infractuous.

¶25

However, the Additional Registrar (Judicial) is directed to verify the records in pending appeal matters before this Bench in how many cases the accused persons

¶26

¶27

were languishing in Jail from many years without suspending the sentence imposed against them, place those cases before the Court for hearing on merits by preparing year-wise list considering the seniority by number of years the accused are in jail and further prepare the list where the accused are on bail in pending matters

¶28

year-wise.

¶29

Sd/JUDGE

¶30

ckk

Chandrappa Rayappa Itagi v. the State by Marihal of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrappa Rayappa Itagi v. the State by Marihal of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balesh Basappa Jatti Vs the State of Karnataka

Hanumesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Korachara Pakkirappa Vs State of Karnataka

State of Karnataka Vs Harish S/O. Subray Hegde

Mahesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Nagaraj S/O. Late S.Satyanarayan Vs the State of Karnataka through