Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, S. K. Lavakumar, was convicted by the trial court in C.C.No.302/2010 for the offence punishable under Section 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for criminal intimidation. The incident occurred on 26.5.2007 at 10.00 a.m. in Balele Devanuru Village, where the accused allegedly brought an SBBL gun to shoot CW.1 and threatened him with dire consequences. The trial court convicted the petitioner and ordered confiscation of the SBBL gun (M.O.1) to the State. The petitioner appealed to the II-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu-Madikeri, sitting at Virajpet, in Crl.A.No.33/2013, which was dismissed on 23.5.2016, confirming the conviction and the confiscation order. The petitioner then filed a criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, challenging only the order of confiscation of the gun, as the petitioner had already been acquitted of the main offence in the revision. The High Court, presided over by Justice K. Somashekar, allowed the revision petition. The court observed that since the petitioner had been acquitted of the offence under Section 506(2) IPC, the order of confiscation of the SBBL gun could not be sustained. The court set aside the confiscation order and directed the release of M.O.1 (SBBL gun) to the custody of the petitioner. The judgment was delivered on 21.11.2019.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Confiscation of Property - Section 452 CrPC - Confiscation order cannot be sustained if the main conviction is set aside - The petitioner was convicted under Section 506(2) IPC and the SBBL gun used in the offence was ordered to be confiscated. However, the petitioner was acquitted of the main offence in the revision. The court held that the confiscation order cannot survive independently and directed return of the gun to the petitioner. (Paras 1-5)
B) Criminal Law - Criminal Intimidation - Section 506(2) IPC - Acquittal - The petitioner was convicted for criminal intimidation but the conviction was set aside in revision. The court noted that the incident occurred on 26.5.2007 and the petitioner was acquitted, so the confiscation of the weapon could not be sustained. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order of confiscation of the SBBL gun (M.O.1) to the State is sustainable when the petitioner has been acquitted of the main offence under Section 506(2) IPC?
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the criminal revision petition, set aside the order of confiscation of M.O.1 (SBBL gun) to the State, and directed the release of M.O.1 to the custody of the petitioner.
Law Points
- Confiscation of property under Section 452 CrPC requires nexus to offence
- order of confiscation cannot be sustained if main conviction is set aside
- property used in commission of offence must be dealt with under Section 452 CrPC
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (11) 52
Criminal Revision Petition No. 965/2017
S. V Shastri, Ravindranath .K, Thejesh .P
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision petition challenging the order of confiscation of a weapon (SBBL gun) in a case of criminal intimidation.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to set aside the order of confiscation of M.O.1 (SBBL gun) to the State and release it to his custody.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was convicted under Section 506(2) IPC and the trial court ordered confiscation of the SBBL gun used in the offence. The appellate court confirmed the conviction and confiscation. The petitioner challenged only the confiscation order in revision.
Previous Decisions
The trial court in C.C.No.302/2010 convicted the petitioner under Section 506(2) IPC and ordered confiscation of the SBBL gun. The appellate court in Crl.A.No.33/2013 confirmed the conviction and confiscation order.
Issues
Whether the order of confiscation of the SBBL gun (M.O.1) to the State is sustainable when the petitioner has been acquitted of the main offence under Section 506(2) IPC?
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that since he was acquitted of the main offence, the confiscation order could not be sustained.
The respondent State argued in support of the confiscation order.
Ratio Decidendi
The order of confiscation of property under Section 452 CrPC cannot be sustained if the main conviction is set aside. Since the petitioner was acquitted of the offence under Section 506(2) IPC, the confiscation order could not survive independently.
Judgment Excerpts
This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner/accused challenging the judgment dated 23.5.2016 rendered by the Court below in Crl.A.No.33/2013 confirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.2.2013 rendered by the trial Court in C.C.No.302/2010 for the offence punishable under Section 506(2) of IPC, in sofar as it relates to order of confiscation of the SBBL gun – M.O.1 to the State.
The brief facts of the case is that on 26.5.2007 at 10.00 a.m. in Balele Devanuru Village when CW.1 had gone to his house, then the accused had brought the SBBL gun in a manner to shoot CW.1 and threatened with dire consequences.
Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is allowed. The order of confiscation of M.O.1 – SBBL gun to the State is set aside. The respondent is directed to release M.O.1 to the custody of the petitioner.
Procedural History
The trial court (Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Ponnampet) convicted the petitioner in C.C.No.302/2010 on 28.02.2013 for offence under Section 506(2) IPC and ordered confiscation of the SBBL gun. The petitioner appealed to the II-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu-Madikeri, sitting at Virajpet, in Crl.A.No.33/2013, which was dismissed on 23.5.2016, confirming the conviction and confiscation. The petitioner then filed Criminal Revision Petition No. 965/2017 before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru under Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC, challenging only the confiscation order. The High Court allowed the revision on 21.11.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 506(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 397, 401, 452
