Ramakrishna a vs State of Karnataka

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Apr 22, 2026

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1560484

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1560484
Court: Karnataka High Court
Judge: V Srishananda
Decided On: Apr 22, 2026
Case Number: CRL.RP/1208/2017

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ramakrishna a

Respondent

State of Karnataka

Excerpt

.....son of the deceased by name sri h.sudeesh was directed to be present before the court. as such, he is present before the court today.3. at the outset, sri s.shankarappa, learned counsel for thepetitioner would submit that, taking note of the fact that the petitioner was working as an employee in a private company and thereafter used to do pooja in the temple during evening hours, having been convicted for the offence punishable under sections 279, 338 and 304a of the indian penal code, who is prepared to pay reasonable amount as compensation to the-3- wife of the deceased who is also injured in the incident and to the son, in a sum of rs.3,00,000/- as compensation, and the imprisonment for the aforesaid offences may be set-aside.4. though this court is not inclined to accept such an offeras a rule, as payment of ‘blood money’ is alien to indian criminal jurisprudence, taking note of the peculiar facts and circumstances involved in the case inasmuch as the rider of the motorcycle (deceased) himself did not possess the licence to drive the motor vehicle and abetted charge sheet came to be filed against him, this court is of the considered opinion that such an offer made by the petitioner can be accepted.5. sri h.sudeesh, son of the deceased is also agreeable toreceive sum of rs.3,00,000/- as additional compensation apart from the compensation that has been received by him and his mother before the motor accident claims tribunal and the pensionary benefits.6. hence without discussing further on the merits of the matter, the following: -4-orderi. revision petition is allowed in part.ii. while maintaining the conviction of the revision petitioner/accused for the offence under sections 279, 338 and 304a of the indian penal code, sentence of imprisonment of one year ordered for the offence under sections 304a ipc is hereby modified by directing the petitioner/accused to undergo simple imprisonment for the day till rising of the court and to pay enhanced fine.....

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.1208 OF 2017 BETWEEN: RAMAKRISHNA A S/O GURURAJA.A AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O NO.22, BOGPURESH, HAROHALLI EXTENSION, VISHWANEEDAM POST, BENGALURU CITY-560 091 PERMANENT R/O NO.1065 RATHADA BEEDI, NEAR RAGHAVENDRASWAMY MUTT, KUSTAGI TOWN, KOPPAL-583 231. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHANKARAPPA S., ADVOCATE A/W SMT. TEJASWINI V., ADVOCATE) AND:
Digitally signed STATE OF KARNATAKA by R
MANJUNATHA         BY MALAVALLI RURAL POLICE STATION
Location: HIGH     REPRESENTED BY SPP
COURT OF           HIGH COURT BUILDING,
KARNATAKA          BENGALURU-560 001.
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE PASSED BY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., MALAVALLI IN C.C.NO.6/2016 DATED 01.07.2017 AND CONFIRMED BY THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS -2- JUDGE, MANDYA IN CRL.A.NO.75/2017 DATED 16.10.2017 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 279, 338 AND 304(A) OF IPC AND SECTION 187 OF INDIAN MOTOR VEHICLE ACT AND ACQUIT THE PETITIONER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL ORDER

Heard Sri S.Shankarappa, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Sri Sri K.Nageshwarappa, learned High Court Government Pleader.

2. At the request of learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused, son of the deceased by name Sri H.Sudeesh was directed to be present before the Court. As such, he is present before the Court today.

3. At the outset, Sri S.Shankarappa, learned counsel for the

petitioner would submit that, taking note of the fact that the petitioner was working as an employee in a private company and thereafter used to do pooja in the temple during evening hours, having been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 338 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code, who is prepared to pay reasonable amount as compensation to the

-3- wife of the deceased who is also injured in the incident and to the son, in a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation, and the imprisonment for the aforesaid offences may be set-aside.

4. Though this Court is not inclined to accept such an offer

as a rule, as payment of ‘blood money’ is alien to Indian Criminal Jurisprudence, taking note of the peculiar facts and circumstances involved in the case inasmuch as the rider of the motorcycle (deceased) himself did not possess the licence to drive the motor vehicle and abetted charge sheet came to be filed against him, this Court is of the considered opinion that such an offer made by the petitioner can be accepted.

5. Sri H.Sudeesh, son of the deceased is also agreeable to

receive sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as additional compensation apart from the compensation that has been received by him and his mother before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the pensionary benefits.

6. Hence without discussing further on the merits of the matter, the following: -4-

ORDER

i. Revision Petition is allowed in part.

ii. While maintaining the conviction of the revision petitioner/accused for the offence under Sections 279, 338 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code, sentence of imprisonment of one year ordered for the offence under Sections 304A IPC is hereby modified by directing the petitioner/accused to undergo simple imprisonment for the day till rising of the Court and to pay enhanced fine amount of Rs.3,00,000/- which can be paid as compensation to PW-3/Gowramma, wife of the deceased who is also injured in the incident and to the son of the deceased by name Sri H.Sudeesh, jointly, under due identification.

iii. Time is granted to pay the enhanced fine amount till 20th May 2026. -5- iv. Failure to pay the enhanced compensation would automatically result in restoration of the imprisonment ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate, confirmed by the learned Judge in the First Appellate Court. v. Office is directed to return the Trial Court Records with copy of this Order for issue of modified conviction warrant. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 2 Sl No.: 74

Same Court & Year Karnataka · 2026 Same Parties Ramakrishna a vs State of Karnataka Same Judge V Srishananda