Partly allowed¶33

Harish Poojary v. the State

Karnataka HC19 Jun 2026CRL.RP/415/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal revision, Karnataka HC; S.397 r/w 401 Cr.PC (tagged 438 BNSS); conviction upheld under Section 379 IPC; sentence modified on payment of enhanced fine Rs.50,000/-; custody treated as imprisonment; release ordered forthwith; first-time offender noted; C.C.No.731/2013 JMFC-II Mangalore; Crl.A.No.45/2014 1st Addl. D&S Judge D.K.; Harish Poojary v. State by Kavoor Police Station; decided 19 June 2026.

What did the court decide?

Conviction under Section 379 IPC maintained; sentence modified — enhanced fine of Rs.50,000/- (already deposited), period spent in custody treated as imprisonment, and the revision petitioner to be released forthwith from Parappana Agrahara, Bengaluru. ¶33

Harish Poojary Vs the State — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the conviction order in C.C.No.731/2013 and its confirmation in Crl.A.No.45/2014 should be set aside and the revision petitioner acquitted. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

Revision petition allowed in part: the conviction of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC in C.C.No.731/2013 is maintained (not set aside).

¶35

Ratio / Principle

The sentence ordered by the Trial Magistrate and confirmed by the First Appellate Court is modified: the revision petitioner is directed to pay an enhanced fine of Rs.50,000/-, and the period spent in custody shall be treated as the period of imprisonment for the proved offence.

¶37

Key takeaways

Since the entire enhanced fine of Rs.50,000/- is already deposited, the Registrar (Judicial) is to communicate necessary information to the Jail Superintendent, Parappana Agrahara, Bengaluru, to release the revision petitioner forthwith.ratio¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (V Srishananda J, 19 June 2026), CRL.RP No. 415 of 2018 (under S.397 r/w 401 Cr.P.C.; cause-title tag 397(Cr.PC)/438(BNSS)): Harish Poojary v. The State by Kavoor Police Station, Mangaluru City. Petitioner, convicted for an offence punishable under Section 379 IPC by the JMFC-II Court, Mangalore in C.C.No.731/2013 (order dt. 01.02.2014), whose sentence was confirmed by the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangalore in Crl.A.No.45/2014 (dt. 22.07.2017), sought setting aside of both orders and acquittal. Held — revision petition allowed in part: conviction maintained; sentence modified upon deposit of an enhanced fine of Rs.50,000/- (memo with receipt filed 16.06.2026), the period spent in custody being treated as the period of imprisonment for the proved offence; Registrar (Judicial) directed to communicate with the Jail Superintendent, Parappana Agrahara, Bengaluru, to release the petitioner forthwith; the Government Pleader noted the petitioner is a first-time offender.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:30334 CRL.RP No. 415 of 2018

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.415 OF 2018 (397(Cr.PC) / 438(BNSS)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

HARISH POOJARY AGED 35 YEARS S/O LATE NARAYANA POOJARY, R/O BOLIYA SITE, KULAVOOR VILLAGE, BAJPE, MANGALORE TALUK – 575 014 D.K

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. T RADHAKRISHNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶11

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

¶12

THE STATE BY KAVOOR POLICE STATION MANGALURU CITY REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU -560 001

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

(BY SRI RANJITH KUMAR.N, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER)

¶15

THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE JMFC-II COURT, MANGALORE IN C.C.NO.731/2013 DATED 01.02.2014 AND ORDER PASSED BY THE 1^ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K., MANGALORE IN CRL.A.NO.45/2014 DATED 22.07.2017 AND ACQUIT THE APPELLANT/REVISION PETITIONER.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:30334 CRL.RP No. 415 of 2018

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

Heard Sri T.Radhakrishna Shetty, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri Ranjith Kumar N, learned High Court Government Pleader.

¶23

This Court adjourned the matter on 30.04.2026. In the earlier hearing, revision petitioner who has suffered an order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code had undertaken to pay Rs.50,000/- as additional fine so as to modify the sentence.

¶24

However, since the revision petitioner could not make the payment, matter was adjourned to 16.06.2026.

¶25

Learned counsel for the revision petitioner Sri Radhakrishna Shetty, has filed the memo on 16.06.2026 alongwith photocopy of the receipt for having deposited a sum of Rs.50,000/-.

¶26

Learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that since the revision petitioner has paid the sum of

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:30334 CRL.RP No. 415 of 2018

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

Rs.50,000/- as additional fine amount and he is a first time offender, suitable orders be passed.

¶31

Hence, the following:

¶32

ORDER

¶33

(i) Revision petition is allowed in part .

¶34

(ii) While maintaining the conviction of the

¶35

accused for the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code in C.C.No.731/2013

¶36

on the file of the JMFC (II Court), Mangaluru, sentence ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate confirmed by the First Appellate Court is modified as under:

¶37

(a) Revision petitioner/accused is directed to pay enhanced fine amount of Rs.50,000/- and period spent in custody shall be treated as period of imprisonment for the proved offence.

¶38

(b) Since the entire enhanced fine of Rs.50,000/- is already deposited, Revision petitioner/accused who is in jail at Parappana Agrahara, Bengaluru, necessary information be communicated

¶39

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:30334 CRL.RP No. 415 of 2018

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

to the Jail Superintendent, Parappana Agrahara, Bengaluru, by Registrar (Judicial) to release the revision petitioner, forthwith.

¶42

Sd/(V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

¶43

kcm List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43

Harish Poojary v. the State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish Poojary v. the State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramappa Vs H.M.Basappa

Sri. Andanappa Vs Sri. Venkatachala

Smt G Lakshmidevamma Vs G N Krishnamurthy

Smt. M. T. Kausalya Vs Smt. Chinnamma

Sri M Y Venkatesh Vs Head Master

C.K Nagaraju Vs Puttamallegowda