Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

KAHC010352992020_1

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
Admin
2026-08-06 05:26:06
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010352992020_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (KAR) (04) 49

Criminal Revision Petition Nos. 175/2021, 550/2020, 552/2020

2022-05-31

H.P. Sandesh

S.R. Ravi Prakash, Pavan Kumar G.

B.A. Harish Gowda, Ravi Kumar, R.K. Ravi Kumar

Ravi Kumar, R.K. Ravi Kumar, B.A. Harish Gowda

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal defamation case for publishing allegedly defamatory articles in a journal.

Remedy Sought

Complainant B.A. Harish Gowda seeking enhancement of sentence; accused Ravi Kumar and R.K. Ravi Kumar seeking acquittal.

Filing Reason

Complainant alleged that accused printed and published defamatory articles in Kannada journal 'Parivala Pathrike', making false imputations against him, and made false declaration about place of printing.

Previous Decisions

Trial Court convicted under Section 500 IPC and Press Act, sentenced 6 months and fine of Rs.25,000; Appellate Court modified to 9 months imprisonment and fine of Rs.10,000, set aside earlier fine; earlier round: initial conviction in 2002 set aside in part by appellate court, revision remanded, leading to new trial.

Submissions/Arguments

Complainant's counsel argued that the publication was per se defamatory, burden of proof was on accused, no evidence led, conduct in prolonging litigation, sentence inadequate; relied on Supreme Court judgments for enhancement powers. Accused's counsel sought to set aside conviction and sentence (no detailed arguments recorded in provided text).

Judgment Excerpts

the accused committed the offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 of IPC as he had printed and published defamatory articles in Kannada Journal “Parivala Pathrike” the Trial Court convicted the accused and sentenced him for a period of 6 months for the offence under Section 500 of IPC and imposed fine of Rs.25,000/- the Appellate Court, dismissed the appeal filed by the accused and allowed the appeal filed by the complainant, however modified the sentence enhancing the imprisonment for a period of 9 months with a fine of Rs.10,000/-

Procedural History

Complainant filed complaint; Trial Court took cognizance in C.C.No.20643/2000; accused pleaded not guilty; Trial Court convicted on 03.10.2002 (1 year imprisonment, fine); appeal in Crl.A.610/2002 partly allowed, confirmed Section 500 conviction, set aside other convictions; revision in Crl.R.P.1045/2006 allowed, matter remanded; after remand, Trial Court again convicted on 30.08.2017 (6 months, fine Rs.25,000); both parties appealed: complainant in Crl.A.1660/2017 for enhancement, accused in Crl.A.1353/2017 against conviction; Appellate Court on 07.07.2020 dismissed accused's appeal, allowed complainant's appeal, enhanced sentence to 9 months and fine Rs.10,000; hence these revision petitions.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 499, 500
  • Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867: Sections 4, 5, 13, 14, 15
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Sections 397, 401
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
defamation criminal revision enhancement of sentence false imputation per se defamatory Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 Section 500 IPC journal false declaration conviction

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
Supreme Court CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7370 OF 2026 2026-08-06 05:26:06
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal by Seller Against Union of India Over Forward Contract Dispute. Contract Held to be a Non-Transferable Specific Delivery Contract under Section 2(f) of Forward Contract (Regulation) Act, 1952, and Thus Not Illegal. 2026-08-06 05:26:06
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition acquittal natural justice murder compensation burden of proof limitation Benefit of doubt Article 226 circumstantial evidence
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.5184 OF 2026

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Against School Tribunal's Denial of Reinstatement t...

Supreme Court Disposes Appeal by Consent Appointing Arbitrator in MSME Dispute, Leaving Le...

Supreme Court Examines Employee's Right to Withdraw Resignation and Effect of Ratification...

Supreme Court Hears Appeals Against Madras High Court’s Setting Aside of Alienations and...

Supreme Court Hears Appeals on Permanent Establishment of Formula One World Championship L...

Supreme Court Interprets Scope of 'Child' under POCSO Act in Appeal Concerning Mentally Ch...

Lost Your Password?