SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shashidhar Purandhar Hegde And vs State Of Karnataka on 15 October, 2004

Shashidhar Purandhar Hegde And vs State Of Karnataka on 15 October, 2004
Author: Arijit Pasayat
Bench: A Pasayat, C Thakker


Appeal (crl.) 748 of 1999


Shashidhar Purandhar Hegde and Anr.


State of Karnataka

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15/10/2004






The appellants faced trial for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 363, 368, 506 and 507 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ‘IPC’). The trial Court directed acquittal of the present appellants being of the view that the accusations have not been established. In appeal by the State, by the impugned judgment the High Court held that the appellants were guilty of offences punishable under Section 363 read with Section 34 IPC and were also liable to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-. Appellant No.1 additionally was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three months on each count for the offences punishable under Sections 506 and 507 IPC. It was directed that in case the fine is paid, a sum of Rs.1,000/- was to be paid to Niranjan (PW-3) the victim. The appellants are described as A-1 and A-2 hereinafter.

The background facts and the findings of the trial Court are as follows:

Niranjan (PW-3) is the son of Sudhakar Kamat (PW-1) and was studying in St. Anthony’s school. PW-3 was a minor then. On 16.2.1989 at about 4.00 p.m. when Niranjan (PW-3) was in his class, his friend Sachin informed him that somebody wants to see him. Accordingly, PW-3 went out of his class room and saw A-1 standing near a motor-bike. He told PW-3 that Dr. Prabhu who is PW-3’s brother-in-law had asked him to take PW-3 whereupon PW-3 told him that he could not go out without the permission of his teacher. A-1 told him that he had already taken permission from his class teacher. Thereafter, he was taken in his motor-bike as a pillion rider. When they reached the 5th Main Road, A-2 was there. All the three of them went by motor-bike. Though PW-3 requested them that he would keep his school bag in his house, A-1 did not agree and he was taken away. Thereafter, they went into a forest for about 2 furlongs where A-1 collected his phone number. When PW-3 enquired about his brother-in-law-Dr. Prabhu, A-1 told him that he would find out about his brother-in-law. At about 6.30 p.m. A-1 came back and discussed something privately with A-2. Then A-2 told him that he had lost his ring and so saying he went to search for the lost ring. However, PW-3 became suspicious and asked A-1 to take him to his house.

Main – Page

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation