Basawaraj Sharanappa Malagavi vs State of Karnataka

P.D. Waingankar, J—This criminal revision petition is filed against the order dated 07.12.2009 in Crl. A. No. 17/2009 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot.

The brief facts, which give rise to this revision petition are as under:

On 19.08.2005 between 2:30 p.m. and 4:40 p.m. in the class room of Government Higher Primary School at Kittali village, accused/petitioner under the guise of evaluating female students of the 3rd standard asked them to come inside the room one after another and went on removing the clothes of the girl students forcibly and behaved indecently by pressing their chest and putting his hands on their private part and thereby he outraged their modesty. A complaint came to be filed.

During the course of investigation, the accused was arrested. Statement of the students, their parents, teachers of the school were recorded and charge-sheet came to be filed against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 354 and 509 of IPC.

The accused having denied the charges leveled against him, the prosecution in all examined 22 witnesses as P.W. 1 to P.W. 22 and relied upon 13 documents, which were marked as Exs. P1 to P13. The learned Magistrate upon appreciation of the evidence reached a conclusion that the prosecution has established that the accused outraged the modesty of the girl students and thereby committed the offences punishable under Section 354 and 509 of IPC. By the judgment dated 22.01.2009, he has been convicted for the aforesaid offences and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC and imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence punishable under Section 509 of IPC. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence passed by the Magistrate, the accused preferred Crl. A. No. 17/2009 before the Sessions Judge, Bagalkot. The learned Sessions Judge on re-appreciation of the evidence, by his judgment dated 07.12.2009, confirmed the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence passed by the Magistrate. Aggrieved by the judgment passed by the Sessions Judge, this revision petition is preferred.

Heard Perused the records.

As stated above, the prosecution examined in all 22 witnesses. Out of the 22 witnesses examined by the prosecution, P.W. 1 - Venkappa Bhimappa Karadigudd is panch to the spot panchanama - Ex. P1, he turned hostile, P.W. 2 - Gurunath Basappa Bajanti, another panch to the spot panchanama, he also turned hostile. P.W. 3 - Spoorti, P.W. 4 - Netravati, P.W. 5 - Shweta, P.W. 6 - Ashwini and P.W. 7 Kavita are all students of the school. All of them have given evidence by and large in the same manner. A conjoint reading of their evidence would go to show that the accused in the guise of evaluation called girl students inside the room one after another removed their clothes and outraged their modesty. Though, these witnesses who are victims have been cross-examined at length by the defence counsel nothing worth has come out of it so as to disbelieve their version. Even otherwise, no girl students aged about ten years will come and depose before the Court in that fashion. Merely because they were all minors and hardly aged about 10 years their evidence cannot be discarded, if it inspires the confidence of the Court.

P.W. 8 - Sanganna is the complainant in this case. His evidence is that in the year 2005 in the second week of August, some teachers came from Azim Premji Foundation for evaluation of the standards of the school so as to provide some Aid. They were there in the school for three days. At that time, the accused used to call the girl students in a room and used to close the door, used to remove the clothes and used to outrage the modesty of the girl students. Since, the head master was out of station, since he had been to Bangalore. After his return, a meeting was held and a complaint came to be lodged against him. In other words, the complainant has also supported the case of the prosecution. P.W. 9 - Shivayya Veerayya Angadi, is the head master of the school. Though, he was not present at the time of incident, he came subsequently from Bangalore, he was informed of the development that had taken place. He has deposed, since he come to school, he heard from the girl students about the acts of the accused. He called the parents and the teachers of the school and taken a decision to lodge a complaint against him. P.W. 10 - Kanakappa Keludeppa Talawar, P.W. 11 - Suresh Fakeerappa Lakkanagoudar, P.W. 12 - Raveendra Echarappa Pattar are the teachers of the said school. They have also given evidence that the accused had come to the school from Azim Premji Foundation, outraged the modesty of the girl students in the guise of evaluating their performance.

P.W. 13 - Gurubasamma Shivappa Veerashettar, the mother of one of the victim girl by name Swetha, P.W. 14 - Ramachandrappa Parasappa Kashid - the father of the student by name Netra, P.W. 15 - Somaningappa Bhimappa Pujar, the father of the student by name Ashwini, all of them have turned hostile to the prosecution case.

P.W. 16 - Mallikarjun Parasappa Hadimani is an employee of Azim Premji Foundation, he has spoken that he had come to school for the purpose evaluation of the performance of the third standard students. His evidence is that at the time of evaluation, the students one after another was taken inside in the school premises. P.W. 17 - Umesh Veerupaxappa Akkasaligar was also a member of Azim Premji Foundation, who had come for evaluation. P.W. 18 - Shekharappa Shankrappa Gadad, P.W. 19 - Kaveri Lakkappa Layadagundi and P.W. 20 - Shilpa Martandappa Gagammanavar are another students aged about 10 years, they have not supported the case of the prosecution. On the other hand they have deposed that the accused have not done anything. P.W. 21 - Lakkappa Takappa Layadagundi, the father of the student by name Kaveri, he also turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. P.W. 22 - G.B. Goudar, CPI of Badami Police Station within whose jurisdiction, the offence took place. He has spoken about the investigation done him and recording of statements. Thus, from the re-appreciation of the evidence one in his evidence that P.Ws. 3 to 7, the girl students have clearly deposed about the acts of the accused and his modus operandi that they have clearly stated that the accused removed their clothes and outraged their modesty. Their evidence also find support from the teachers of the school. From the evidence on record, the prosecution has made out offences punishable under Sections 354 and 509 of IPC. Thus, the learned magistrate on appreciation of the evidence and the learned Sessions Judge on re-appreciation of the evidence rightly recorded the finding that the prosecution has able to establish both charges leveled against the accused persons.

On perusal of the entire evidence, I have no reason to come to a different conclusion than'' the conclusion reached by both the learned Magistrate and the learned Sessions Judge. There is no merit in this appeal. Hence, I pass the following:

ORDER

The criminal revision petition is dismissed.