Shivakumar Vs the State of Karnataka by — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2025)

Shivakumar Vs the State of Karnataka by — Dowry and Cruelty | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Criminal Appeal allowed in part: convictions under Sections 498A, 504, 324, 323 IPC maintained; imprisonment of appellant No.1 set aside with fine enhanced by Rs.50,000/-, to be deposited on or before 30th March 2025 and paid entirely as compensation to P.W.1/de facto complainant under due identification, in addition to the Rs.60,000/- compensation awarded by the Trial Court; appeal dismissed as abated against deceased appellant No.2; Office directed to return the Trial Court records with a copy of the judgment for issuing a modified conviction warrant.

Issue for consideration

Whether the conviction and sentence passed on the appellants by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Hassan in S.C.No.50/2011 (order dated 07.11.2013) should be set aside, as prayed for under Section 374(2) CrPC. +1 more

Court's answer

The conviction of the appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 324, 323 of the Indian Penal Code is maintained.

Ratio / Principle

Since accused No.2 (appellant No.2) died during pendency of the appeal, the appeal stands dismissed as abated against appellant No.2.

Key takeaways

The sentence of imprisonment ordered against appellant No.1 stands set aside, with the fine amount enhanced by Rs.50,000/-, in view of the decree of divorce granted by the competent Court.ratio¶49
The entire enhanced fine of Rs.50,000/- is to be paid as compensation to P.W.1/de facto complainant, in addition to the compensation of Rs.60,000/- awarded by the Trial Court.ratio¶54

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Appeal No.1127 of 2013 (C), filed under Section 374(2) CrPC by Shivakumar, K.K. Erappa and Hoovamma against their conviction dated 07.11.2013 in S.C.No.50/2011 (Addl. Sessions Judge, Hassan): accused No.1 convicted under Sections 498A, 504 and 324 IPC (one year simple imprisonment plus fines of Rs.20,000, Rs.10,000 and Rs.20,000); accused Nos.2 and 3 convicted under Sections 504, 323 r/w 34 IPC (fines of Rs.10,000 and Rs.1,000 each); total fine Rs.72,000, of which Rs.60,000 was directed to P.W.1 as compensation and Rs.12,000 confiscated to the State; benefit under Section 428 CrPC noted. During pendency, appellant No.2 died and the appeal stood dismissed as abated against him; matrimonial proceedings between the de facto complainant and the appellant ended in dissolution of marriage. Justice V Srishananda (single-judge Bench, oral judgment dated 27.02.2025), with the concurrence of the High Court Government Pleader, allowed the appeal in part: convictions under Sections 498A, 504, 324, 323 IPC were maintained, but the imprisonment of appellant No.1 was set aside and the fine enhanced by Rs.50,000/-, payable wholly as compensation to the de facto complainant (P.W.1) in addition to the Rs.60,000/- awarded by the Trial Court, with time until 30th March 2025 to deposit; Office to return Trial Court records for issuance of a modified conviction warrant.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1127 OF 2013(C)

BETWEEN:

SHIVAKUMAR

S/O K.K. ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURIST R/O KADUMANE VILLAGE HANUBALU HOBLI SAKALESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT -573 134

K.K. ERAPPA

Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

S/O LATE KUMARPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURIST R/O KADUMANE VILLAGE HANUBALU HOBLI SAKALESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 134

HOOVAMMA S/O K.K. ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O KADUMANE VILLAGE, HANUBALU HOBLI SAKALESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT -573 134

…APPELLANTS

(BY SRI UMESH.P.B FOR SRI RAVINDRA B DESHPANDE, ADVOCATES)

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SAKALESHPURA RURAL POLICE STATION – 573 134

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER )

THIS CRL.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.11.2013 PASSED BY THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN IN S.C.NO.50/2011 - CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.1 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 504, 324 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE AND THE CONVICTING THE APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NOS.2 AND 3 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 504, 323 R/W 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard Sri Umesh P.B. on behalf of Sri R.B.Deshpande,

learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Channappa Erappa, learned High Court Government Pleader.

De facto complainant being the wife of accused No.1 and daughter in law of accused No.3 is present before the Court. Accused No.2 said to have died during pendency of the appeal.

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013

As such, appeal stands dismissed as abated as against appellant No.2.

Having heard the parties in detail, it is noticed that after the present case came to be filed, there was a matrimonial proceedings between de facto complainant and appellant No.2 which ended in dissolution of marriage between them. Appellants have been convicted and sentenced in S.C.No. 50/2011 dated 07.11.2013 on the file of the Addl. Sessions Judge, Hassan, as under:

“Accused No.1 is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000-00, in default to undergo S.I. for three months for the offence punishable under Section 498(A) of Indian Penal Code.

Accused No.1 is further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.10,000-00, in default to undergo S.I. for one month for the offence punishable under Section 504 of Indian Penal Code.

Accused No.1 is further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.20,000-00, in default to undergo S.I. for three months for the offence punishable under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013

Accused Nos.2 and 3 are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.10,000-00 each, in default to undergo S.I. for two months for the offence punishable under Section 504 of Indian Penal Code.

Accused Nos.2 and 3 are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000-00 each, in default to undergo S.I. for 15 day for the offence punishable under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code.

Total fine amount payable is Rs.72,000-00. Out of this, Rs.60,000/- be paid over to P.W.1 towards compensation and balance of Rs.12,000-00 is ordered to be confiscated to the State.

Accused No.1 is entitled for benefit under Section 428 Criminal Procedure Code.”

Taking note of the development in the matter, especially the decree of divorce being granted by the competent Court, keeping sentence intact would not be beneficial to the de facto complainant or for the accused. Instead, if the fine amount is enhanced in a sum of Rs.50,000/- which can be paid as compensation to the de facto complainant by setting aside the imprisonment, ends of justice would be met.

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013

Learned High Court Government Pleader has no objection for modification of the sentence subject to payment of the enhanced fine amount.

Placing the submission on behalf of the appellants as well as the learned High Court Government Pleader and submission made by the de facto complainant, following Order is passed:

ORDER

(i) Criminal Appeal is allowed in part .

(ii) While maintaining the conviction of the appellants for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 324, 323 of the Indian Penal Code, sentence of imprisonment ordered as against appellant No.1 stands set-aside by enhancing the fine amount in a sum of Rs.50,000/-. Fine imposed by the Trial Court said to have been deposited before the Trial Court.

(iii) Time is granted to deposit the entire enhanced fine amount till 30^th March 2025.

6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:8741 CRL.A No. 1127 of 2013

(iv) After receipt of the fine amount, entire enhanced fine amount in a sum of Rs.50,000/- is ordered to be paid as compensation to P.W.1/ de facto complainant under due identification.

(v) It is made clear that enhanced sum of Rs.50,000/compensation is being paid in addition to the compensation of Rs.60,000/awarded by the Trial Court.

(vi) Office to return the Trial Court Records forthwith along with copy of this judgment for issuing modified conviction warrant.

Sd/(V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

kcm

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13