Bangalore District Court
Rajajinagar Police Station vs Kumaresh on 1 July, 2024
KABC030775232022
Presented on : 01-10-2022
Registered on : 01-10-2022
Decided on : 01-07-2024
Duration : 1 years, 9 months, 0 days
IN THE COURT OF THE XXXII ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, AT BENGALURU
PRESENT
SMT.LATHA .J, B.COM, LL.B.,
XXXII Addl.C.M.M, Bengaluru
Dated this the 01st day of July 2024
Criminal Case No.31208/2022
Complainant : The State through
Police Sub Inspector,
Rajajinagar Layout Police Station
(By Asst. Public Prosecutor)
--- V/s ---
Accused : N.Kumaresh,
S/o.late.Nataraj,
Aged about 38 years,
R/at.No.12, 7th cross,
5th main road, Mariyappana-
palya, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru-21.
(Reptd by Sri.Kiran Kumar..Adv.,)
Date of commencement of : 25.02.2022
offence
2
C.C.31802/2022
Date of report of offence : 26.02.2022
Arrest of the accused : ---
Name of the Informant : Thyagaraj.K
Date of commencement of : 19.06.2024
recording evidence
Date of closing of : 19.06.2024
evidence
Offences complained of : U/s. 323, 325, 504 and
506 of IPC
Opinion of the Judge : Accused is found not
guilty
Date of Judgment : 01.07.2024
XXXII Addl.C.M.M
Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
The Police Sub Inspector of Rajajinagar P.S has submitted the Charge Sheet against the accused for the offences punishable Under Secs. 323, 325, 504 and 506 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the Prosecution case are as follows:
That on 25.02.2022 at about 12.30P.M, while the C.W.1 was driving the school van on 7th cross, 5th Main road, Mariyappanapalya and while turning the school van said vehicle touched to the scooter of the accused which was parked and was about to fall down and at that 3 C.C.31802/2022 time the accused picked up quarrel with C.W.1 and abused him in filthy language and without any provocation assaulted C.W.1 with hands on his neck and assaulted C.W.1 with force on his face and caused grievous bleeding injury on his mouth. Further the accused criminally intimidated to the life of C.W.1 and thereby the accused has committed the offences punishable Under Secs.504, 323, 325 and 506 of IPC.
3. On the basis of the Statement of CW-1, the Rajajinagar Police have registered a case under Crime No.24/2022 for the offences punishable U/s 504, 323 and 506 of IPC against the accused and submitted the FIR before the court. Thereafter the investigating officer visited the spot and drawn the spot mahazar and recorded the statement of witnesses on completion of the investigation, the Charge Sheet has been filed against the accused for the offences punishable Under Secs. 504, 323, 325 and 506 of IPC. On the receipt of the police report, this court has taken cognizance for the said offences.
4. On the appearance of the accused, the accused was enlarged on bail. The copies of prosecution papers were furnished to the accused as contemplated U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. The charge was 4 C.C.31802/2022 framed against the accused for the offences punishable u/s 504, 323, 325 and 506 of IPC and read over to him. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the matter was posted for evidence.
5. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused the prosecution has got examined 01 witness as PW-1 and out of the total charge sheet witnesses as CW-1 to 7 and got marked three documents as Ex.P1 to 3 with sub-markings. Since PW-1 who is the material witness turned hostile to the case of the prosecution and since there is no incriminating evidence against the accused from the material witness, no purpose would be served by issuing summons to rest of the witnesses. Hence, the evidence of the rest of the witnesses is dropped by rejecting the prayer of the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. The statement of the accused as required Under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C was dispensed with as there were no incriminating circumstances in the evidence of prosecution witness.
6. I have heard the arguments addressed by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned advocate for the accused . 5
C.C.31802/2022
7. On going through the facts and circumstances of the prosecution case, the following points would arise for my consideration:
POINTS
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on 25.02.2022 at about 12.30P.M, while the C.W.1 was driving the school van on 7th cross, 5th Main road, Mariyappanapalya and while turning the school van said vehicle touched to the scooter of the accused which was parked and was about to fall down and at time the accused picked up quarrel with C.W.1 and abused him in filthy language, knowingly that it would give provocation to C.W.1 to breach public peace and thereby the accused has committed the offence of "intentional insult" punishable U/s 504 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place accused without any provocation assaulted C.W.1 with hands and caused hurt and thereby the accused have committed an offence of "voluntarily causing hurt" punishable U/s 323 of IPC ?6
C.C.31802/2022
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place accused assaulted C.W.1 with force on his face and caused grievous injury on his mouth and thereby the accused has committed an offence of "voluntarily causing grievous hurt" punishable U/s 325 of IPC ?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place accused criminally intimidated to life of C.W.1 and thereby the accused has committed an offence of "criminal intimidation" punishable U/s 506 of IPC?
5. What Order ?
8. My findings to the above Points are as under:
Point No. 1 to 4 : In the Negative.
Point No.5 : As per final order, For the following: -
REASONS
9. Point No.1 to 4:-As these points are interlinked with each other and also similar evidence is led on all these points, I have taken 7 C.C.31802/2022 all these points together for common discussion in order to avoid repetition of facts and discussion.
10. It is the allegation that the accused has committed the offences punishable u/s 504, 323, 325 and 506 of IPC.
11. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has got examined CW.1 is examined as PW.1.
Out of the documents marked for the prosecution Ex.P1 is the complaint, Ex.P.2 is the mahazar, Ex.P.3 is the statement of P.W.1.
12. In support of the case of prosecution, C.W.1- informant by name Thyagaraj is examined as P.W.1. This witness deposed that he knows the accused and the accused did not abuse him in filthy language, did not assault him with hands on his neck and did not punch him on his face and cause grievous injury and he has not taken any treatment. The accused did not threaten him with dire consequences. He has not lodged complaint before the police. The police took his signature on the blank paper, but he does not know the contents of complaint which is at Ex.P.1. The police did not draw mahazar in his presence and did not seize any articles in his presence. He does not know the contents of mahazar which is 8 C.C.31802/2022 marked as Ex.P.2 and he has not given any statement before the police as per Ex.P.3.
This witness was treated as hostile witness by the Learned Sr.Asst.Public Prosecutor and cross examined at length. In the cross examination also nothing worth could be elicited from his mouth to support the case of the prosecution and he denied the suggestion that he had compromised the matter with the accused.
13. Now the question which arises before the court is whether the evidence placed on record is sufficient to establish the case of the prosecution. As I have above stated, the prime witnesses P.W.1 fully turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. After appreciating the evidence placed on record, it is clear that the evidence of P.W.1 is not inspiring confidence to act upon and to hold that the accused has committed the alleged offences.
14. Now on overall perusal of the evidence and prosecution witness as complainant/PW-1 is the material witness has not supported the case of the prosecution. PW-1 denied the entire case of the prosecution and also turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. The PW-1 during the course of his evidence has not at 9 C.C.31802/2022 all stated in respect of abuse, assault made by the accused and he has denied the involvement of the accused and at the out set he has denied the entire case of the prosecution.
15. However, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor prays to issue summons to other witnesses. Having considered the facts and circumstances of this case, this court was of the opinion that even if other witnesses were examined, it would be a futile exercise and no lawful purpose would have been served. As such examination of the prosecution witnesses only for the purpose of completing the procedural aspect and will not serve any judicial purpose and it is sheer waste of the precious time of the court. Therefore, the prayer of the learned APP to issue summons to other witnesses was rejected. At this stage this court relied upon judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1996 (3) Crimes 84 Sathish Mehra V/s Delhi Administration & another: wherein at page No.13 the Hon'ble Apex Court held as follows:
"When the judge is fairly certain that there is no prospect of the case ending in conviction the valuable time of the court should not be wasted for holding a trial only for the purpose of formally completing the procedure 10 C.C.31802/2022 to pronounce the conclusion on the future date".
The principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above case is applicable in this case also. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is clear that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Under these facts and circumstances of the case, the above Point No.1 to 4 is answered in the 'NEGATIVE'.
16. Point No.5: - In view of the findings of point No.1 to 4 , this court proceed to pass the following;
ORDER Acting U/Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused is acquitted of the offences punishable U/Sec.504, 323, 325 and 506 of Indian Penal Code.
Bail bonds of the accused and Surety bonds shall stand canceled.
The bail bond executed U/s 437(A) Cr.P.C shall be continued.
(Dictated to the Stenographer online and typed by her, judgment corrected and signed by me, then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 1st day of July, 2024).
(Latha. J) XXXII Addl.C.M.M, Bengaluru.
11
C.C.31802/2022 ANNEXURES List of the Witnesses examined by the Prosecution:
PW-1 Thyagaraj C.W.1 19.06.2024 List of the Documents exhibited for the Prosecution:
Ex.P1 : Complaint Ex.P1(a) : Signature of PW-1 Ex.P2 : Mahazar Ex.P2(a) : Signature of PW-1 Ex.P.3 : Statement of PW.1
List of the MOs marked on behalf of the Prosecution:
--Nil--
List of the Witnesses examined for defence:
--Nil--
List of the Documents exhibited for defence:
--Nil--
List of the MOs marked on behalf of Defence:
--Nil--
Digitally signed by LATHA LATHA Date:
J
J 2024.07.05
12:26:58
+0530
(Latha. J)
XXXII Addl.C.M.M,
Bengaluru