G NANJEGOWDA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition by the accused filed under Sections 397 and 401 Cr. P. C. is directed against the judgment dated 30-10-2003 passed in Crl. A. No. 11/2001 on the file of the Prl. Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, wherein the learned Sessions Judge had partly allowed the appeal, confirming the finding of conviction of the accused for the offence under Section 326 I. P. C. and remanding the case to the learned Magistrate to hear the accused and the public prosecutor on the sentence and then pass appropriate orders, which appeal had been preferred against the judgment dated 19-4-2001 passed in C. C. No. 17/1996 on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and Addl. J. M. F. C. Ramanagara, wherein the learned Magistrate had recorded a finding of conviction of the accused for the said offence and had sentenced him to imprisonment for a period of six months for the said offence, challenging the legality and propriety of the judgments impugned.

(2.) THE Court has heard the arguments of Sri C. V. Nagesh, learned counsel on behalf of the revision petitioner-accused, and Sri B. A. Belliappa, learned Government Pleader on behalf of the respondent-State.

(3.) THE learned counsel for revision petitioner strenuously contended that the material on record clearly shows that the judgments impugned are illegal and improper. The prosecution had utterly failed to bring home the guilt of the accused as required under law. The evidence placed on record is highly insufficient and unacceptable. The learned counsel also contends that the learned Magistrate had committed a grave error while framing charge against the accused. The provisions of Section 240 (2), Cr. P. C. had not been complied and the same vitiates the whole trial. The learned counsel relied upon a decision of this Court, reported in 1980 (2) Kar LJ SN 115, in support of his contentions. Placing reliance on the ratio laid down in the said decision, he prayed for allowing the revision petition.