Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Bangalore District Court

State By Rajagopalanagara Police vs Alleging That The Accused Has Committed ... on 5 October, 2016

    IN THE COURT OF THE VII ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.

                     Dated this the 5th day of October 2016

     Present: Sri. G.V.Chandrashekhar., B.E (Civil), LL.M., P.G.Dip. in
         International Law and International Relations, New Delhi.,
                        VII ADDL. C.M.M., Bengaluru.


                      JUDGMENT U/S.355 OF Cr.P.C.:

1. CC NO.                  :     34729/2011

2. Date of offence         :     6.5.2011

3. Complainant             :     State by Rajagopalanagara Police
                                 Station

4. Accused                 :     B.K.Chethan Kumar
                                 s/o B.R.Krishnegowda,
                                 27 years, r/at Madihalli Village,
                                 Kundur Post,
                                 K.Hosakote Hobli,
                                 Alur Taluk, Hassan District.


5. Offences complained of :      385, 420, 506 IPC

6. Plea                    :     Accused pleaded not guilty

7. Final order             :     Acting U/s. 248 (1) Accused is acquitted


      The complainant police have        filed the charge sheet against the

accused alleging that the accused has committed offence punishable under

Sec. 385, ,  of IPC.
                                       2


      2. The case of the prosecution is that on 6.5.2011 during night accused

person has taken the Tempo traveller vehicle KA-46-2499 in front of the

house of C.W.8 D. Krupakara and removed the LDC TV and Tools from the

vehicle and asked him to deposit Rs 1,50,000/- to his account thereby tried

to extort money thereby cheated him and criminally intimidated him and

thereby the accused person has committed the aforesaid offence.

      3. After filing of the charge sheet, accused is secured and released on

bail. Charge sheet copy is furnished to the accused.        Charge framed and

read over to him. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. After that

prosecution examined 1 witness as P.W.1 and got marked 2 documents as

Ex.P.1 and P.2. The accused was not questioned under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C.

as there were no incriminating circumstances appeared against him.

      4. Heard arguments from both sides.

      5. The points that arise for my consideration are :

         (1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that
             on 6.5.2011 during night accused person has taken the Tempo
             traveller vehicle KA-46-2499 in front of the house of C.W.8 D.
             Krupakara and removed the LDC TV and Tools from the
             vehicle and asked him to deposit Rs 1,50,000/- to his account
             thereby tried to extort money thereby cheated him and
             criminally intimidated him and thereby the accused person has
             committed the aforesaid offence ?

         (2) What order?
                                         3


      6. Having regard to the arguments heard and the materials placed on

record, my answer to the above points are :

      Point No.1           :      In the negative

      Point No.2           :      See final order, for the following :

                                      REASONS

Point No.1 :

      7. P.W.1 is the complainant and material witness has turned hostile

and did not support the prosecution and interalia that he has compromised

the same with the accused. So when such being the situation, in view of the

above there being no material, to inculpate the accused, the only conclusion

which can be drawn is that the prosecution has failed to prove its case and

accordingly I have to answer the above point in the negative and pass the

following order.


Point No. 2 :

      8. In view of the reasons stated at point No.1, I proceed to pass the

following:

                                  O R D E R:

Acting U/s. 248(1) of the Criminal Procedure code, the accused is acquitted for the offence punishable U/s. 385, 420, 506 of IPC.

Acting under Sec. 437-A of Cr.P.C., it is ordered that the personal bond executed by the accused and surety bond executed by the surety for accused shall be in force for a further period of 6 months from this day.

Interim orders made with respect to properties seized in P.F. No. 166/2011 is made absolute.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript thereof is computerized and print out taken by him is verified, corrected & then pronounced by me in the Open Court dated this the 5th day of October 2016) (G.V.CHANDRASHEKHAR), VII ACMM, BENGALURU.

ANNEXURES:

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the Prosecution:

P.W.1 : Ravi List of documents marked on behalf of the Prosecution:

Ex.P.1           :        Complaint
Ex.P.2           :        Spot mahazar

List of Material Objects marked on behalf of the Prosecution:

Nil For defence: - NIL -

VII ACMM, BENGALURU. 5 6 7