Bangalore District Court
State By Police Inspector vs Arun @ Kadak on 19 December, 2022
1 S.C.No.1466/2021
IN THE COURT OF THE XXVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL
& SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL, BENGALURU,
[CCH.NO.29]
Present :- Sri. K.M. Rajashekar, B.Sc., L.L.M.,
Dated this the 19th day of December 2022
S.C.No.1466/2021
Complainant:- State by Police Inspector,
Halasuru Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(By Public Prosecutor)
V/s
Accused:- Arun @ Kadak,
S/o Murugan,
Aged about 23 years,
R/at No.323, 10th Cross,
4th Main, M.V. Garden,
Halasuru,
Bengaluru.
(By Sri. RY Advocate)
1. Date of Offence : 31.1.2019
2. Date of report of Offence : 1.2.2019
3. Date of arrest of accused : 21.2.2019
2 S.C.No.1466/2021
4. Date of release of accused on bail : Accused is on bail in
Crl.Misc.No.25551/2021 dtd: 5.5.2021.
5. Period of undergone in custody
(during pre-trial) : Y M D
: 02 02 14
6. Name of the Complainant : Smt. Pooja.
7. Commencement of trial : 16.11.2021
8. Closing of evidence : 16.11.2021
9. Offences complained of : U/S 324, 307 of IPC.
10. Opinion of the Judge : Accused Person found not
guilty, hence, he is acquitted.
[K.M. Rajashekhar],
XXVIII. Addl. City Civil Judge,
Mayo hall, Bangalore.
JUDGMENT
This is a Charge Sheet submitted by the C.W.16 Sri. Amaresh, Police Sub-Inspector, Halasuru Police Station, against the Accused for the offences punishable U/Sec.324, 307 of IPC.
3 S.C.No.1466/2021
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are as under:
That on 31.1.2019 at about 10.00 p.m., when the CW.2 and CW.3 were standing near R.K. Tent House, 7 th Main, M.V. Garden, within the limits of Halasuru Police Station, the Accused came there and in connection with the old enmity the Accused abused them in filthy language and all of a sudden took out knife and assaulted CW.2 on his right side hand, shoulder and thigh and have caused grievous injuries with an intention to kill him and when the CW.3 came to the rescue of CW.2 the Accused assaulted him on his left hand with knife and thereafter when the CW.1 tried to pacify them, the Accused assaulted her on his body and has caused grievous injuries to her and thereby caused grievous hurt to them and thereby committed the offences punishable under Section 324, 307 of IPC. Hence, the complaint.
3. Thereafter, based on the complaint of Complainant-C.W.1- Smt. Pooja, a case is registered in Crime No.24/2019 of Halasuru Police Station for the offences punishable U/S 324, 307 of IPC., and after 4 S.C.No.1466/2021 completion of investigation submitted Charge Sheet for the offences punishable U/Sec. 324, 307 of IPC.
4. The Committal Court after taking cognizance of the offences has registered the case against the Accused Persons. Later, Accused produced before the Court and remanded to judicial custody. The copy of Charge Sheet was furnished to the Accused person as required U/S 207 of Cr.P.C., and thereafter heard both sides, case has been committed for trial.
5. After registration of case before this Court, Accused marked his appearance before the Court through his Counsel. After hearing both sides, charge for the offences punishable U/S 324, 307 of IPC., has been framed and it was read over and explained to the Accused Person in the language known to him. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried by the Court. Hence, the trial was fixed.
6. The Prosecution has examined 03 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.3 out of 17 witnesses cited in the Charge 5 S.C.No.1466/2021 Sheet, got marked documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7 and MO.1 in support of its case.
7. After conclusion of Prosecution evidence, Accused was dispensed from examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., as there are no incriminating circumstances established against the Accused Person. Accused did not choose to lead any evidence on his behalf.
8. Heard both side arguments and perused the records.
9. Now the points that arose for my consideration are as under:
1) Whether the Prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on 31.1.2019 at about 10.00 p.m., when the CW.2 and CW.3 were standing near R.K. Tent House, the Accused in connection with the old enmity abused them in filthy language and took out knife and assaulted CW.2 on his right side hand, shoulder and thigh and have an intention to kill 6 S.C.No.1466/2021 him and when the CW.3 came to the rescue of CW.2 the Accused assaulted him on his left hand with knife and thereafter when the CW.1 tried to pacify them, the Accused assaulted her on his body and has caused injuries and thereby committed the offences punishable under Section 324, 307 of Indian Penal Code?
2) What Order?
10. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the Negative.
Point No.2 : As per final order, for the
following:
REASONS
11. Point No.1:- Upon going through the
prosecution theory, it indicates that, according to the Prosecution, that on 31.1.2019 at about 10.00 p.m., when the CW.2 and CW.3 were standing near R.K. Tent House, 7th Main, M.V. Garden, within the limits of Halasuru Police 7 S.C.No.1466/2021 Station, the Accused came there and in connection with the old enmity the Accused abused them in filthy language and all of a sudden took out knife and assaulted CW.2 on his right side hand, shoulder and thigh and have caused grievous injuries with an intention to kill him and when the CW.3 came to the rescue of CW.2 the Accused assaulted him on his left hand with knife and thereafter when the CW.1 tried to pacify them, the Accused assaulted her on his body and has caused grievous injuries to her and thereby caused grievous hurt to them and thereby committed the offences punishable under Section 324, 307 of IPC. In support of its case the Prosecution has examined 03 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.3 out of 17 witnesses cited in the Charge Sheet, got marked documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7 and MO.1 in support of the Prosecution.
12. Upon going through the materials available on record, it indicates that in support of their case, Prosecution cited 17 witnesses in the Charge Sheet and able to examined only 03 witnesses out of 17 witnesses. 8 S.C.No.1466/2021
13. The Prosecution has charge sheeted the Accused for the offence punishable under Section 324, 307 of IPC, but unfortunately, none of the witnesses including the Complainant/P.W.1 and Injured/CW.1 and CW.2 have not supported the case of the Prosecution and turned hostile.
14. On perusal of oral evidence of P.W.1, who is the witness to the Mahazar Ex.P.1, she denied the very incident and she straightaway denied the very lodging of complaint. It is claimed by him that on 31.1.2019 at about 10.00 PM there was some altercation between the Accused and the Complainant and her husband regarding petty quarrel. In that regard, some people who are enimical towards them took their signature in a blank paper and registered a false case. The Accused did not assaulted her or CW.2 and CW.3 with knife. He never attempted to kill them. She has not given any statement before the Police. Hence, the learned P.P., treated this witness as hostile. In his cross-examination, this witness denies the suggestion of the Prosecution by deposing that:
9 S.C.No.1466/2021
It is not correct to suggest that on 31.10.2009 at about 10.0 PM Accused picked up quarrel with CW.2 and CW.3 and assaulted on CW.2's right hand with knife, waist and right eye. It is not correct to suggest that Accused assaulted on left hand of CW.3 and attempted to kill them. It is not correct to suggest that in this regard I have lodged complaint as per Ex.P.1 and witnessed spot Mahazar as per Ex.P.2 and on the recovery of knife Mo.1.
15. On perusal of evidence of P.W.2 injured independent eye-witness to the alleged incident, he denied the very incident and he straightaway denied the very assault on him. He deposed that on 31.1.2019 at about 10.00 PM there was some altercation between the Accused and the Complainant and her husband regarding petty quarrel. In that regard, some people who are enimical towards them took their signature in a blank paper and registered a false case. The Accused did not assaulted him or CW.1 and CW.3 with knife. He never attempted to kill them. He has not given any statement before the Police. Hence, the learned P.P. treated this 10 S.C.No.1466/2021 witnesses as hostile. In his cross-examination, this witness deposes that:
It is not correct to suggest that on 31.10.2009 at about 10.00 p.m., Accused picked up quarrel with us and assaulted on my right hand with knife, waist and right eye. It is not correct to suggest that Accused assaulted on left hand of CW.3 and attempted to kill them. It is not correct to suggest that in this regard I have given statement before Police as per "Nanu gurisuteene ........... as per Ex.P.3. It is not correct to suggest that I am deposing false to help the Accused.
16. PW.2 is the injured, he straightaway denied the incident, much-less the very lodging of complaint also straightaway denied.
17. On perusal of evidence of P.W.3 independent eye-witness to the alleged incident, he denied the very incident and he straightaway denied the very assault on CW.1. He deposed that on 31.1.2019 at about 10.00 PM there was some altercation between the Accused and the Complainant regarding petty quarrel. In that regard, some 11 S.C.No.1466/2021 people who are enimical towards them took their signature in a blank paper and registered a false case. The Accused did not assaulted him or CW.1 and CW.2 with knife. He never attempted to kill them. He has not given any statement before the Police. Hence, the learned P.P., treated this witnesses as hostile. In his cross- examination, this witness deposes that:
It is not correct to suggest that on 31.10.2009 at about 10.00 p.m., Accused picked up quarrel with us and assaulted on my right hand with knife, waist and right eye. It is not correct to suggest that Accused assaulted on left hand of CW.3 and attempted to kill them. It is not correct to suggest that in this regard I have given statement before Police as per "Nanu gurisuteene ........... as per Ex.P.3. It is not correct to suggest that I am deposing false to help the Accused.
18. PW.3 is the brother-in-law of the injured/CW.1, he straightaway denied the incident, much-less the very lodging of complaint also straightaway denied. 12 S.C.No.1466/2021
19. Upon going through evidence they have claimed that PW.1 was not subjected to any assault by Accused much less an attempt to murder CW.1 to CW.3. Hence, the Prosecution treated them hostile and cross- examined them, but even in the cross-examination P.W.1 to P.W.3 denied the incident much less assault on them. The injures eye-witness and independent witness P.W.2 and PW.3 also turned hostile.
20. Upon going through the materials available on record, it is significant to note that, even though, Charge Sheet is filed U/Sec. 324, 307 of IPC. But, upon perusal of the complaint averments as well as the evidence, it indicates that, the alleged incident took place for petty reason. It is to be noted that, there is an allegation on the Accused that he has assaulted P.W.1 to P.W.3, but, unfortunately, the very Complainant and injured witness denied this incident. Upon going through the evidence placed by the Prosecution, the star witness P.W.2/Injured and P.W.1 and P.W.3 independent eye-witnesses have turned hostile and not supported the prosecution case. Irony is that, the Complainant/injured straightaway turned 13 S.C.No.1466/2021 hostile denying the very incident itself. Not even prima- facie evidence presented by the Prosecution to prove the incident much-less the allegations regarding assault and attempt to murder. The sincere effort of Learned Public Prosecutor in eliciting incriminating materials during the cross-examination of this witness, after treating P.W.1 hostile, yields no fruits. The Prosecution utterly failed in establishing the very incident itself, much-less the overt act committed by the Accused Person.
20. It is seen that the very injured P.W.2 claimed that he was not subjected to any assault by Accused nor an attempt to kill him. Hence, there is no point of examining CW.12 to CW.17 which are only formal witnesses who registered complaint and done investigation. Hence, evidence of CW.12 to CW.17 is dropped, rejecting the prayer of the Learned Public Prosecutor. Since there are no incriminating materials to examine the Accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., same is dispensed.
21. Keeping in view of these facts, I am of the opinion that, absolutely no case is made out by the 14 S.C.No.1466/2021 Prosecution to prove the guilt of the Accused Person beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, I hold that, materials available on record are not sufficient to accept the allegations against the Accused Person to fix him into this alleged crime. Hence, I hold that Accused Person is entitle for an order of acquittal. Accordingly, I answer Point No.1 in Negative.
22. Point No.2:- From the discussions made in the above Point No.1, it is very much clear that Accused is entitled for an order of acquittal and in the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Invoking the provisions U/S 232 of Cr.P.C., Accused is acquitted for the offences punishable U/Sec.324, 307 of IPC.
The bail bonds of accused and their sureties shall stand cancelled.
The articles seized in PF.No.23/201 dtd:
22.2.2021 of Halasuru Police Station being worthless, is ordered to be destroyed, after 15 S.C.No.1466/2021 expiry of appeal period, if the same is not required for any other purpose.
(Dictated to the Stenographer on computer directly on computer, typed & computerized by her, corrected and signed by me and then pronounced in the open Court on this the 19th day of December 2022).
[K.M. Rajashekhar], XXVIII. Addl. City Civil Judge, Mayo hall, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE Witnesses examined on behalf of Prosecution:
P.W.1 : Pooja.
P.W.2 : Rahul Kumar.
P.W.3 : Dhanaraj.
Exhibits marked on behalf of Prosecution:
Ex.P.1 : Complaint.
Ex.P.2 : Spot Mahazar.
Ex.P.3 : Statement of injured.
Ex.P.4 : Statement of PW.3.
Ex.P.5 : Recovery Mahazar.
Ex.P.6 & 7 : Wound Certificates.
Witnesses examined on behalf of Accused:
Nil.16 S.C.No.1466/2021
Exhibits marked on behalf of Accused:
Nil.
Material Objects marked on behalf of Prosecution:
MO.1 : Knife.
[K.M. Rajashekhar], XXVIII. Addl. City Civil Judge, Mayo hall, Bangalore.17 S.C.No.1466/2021
Order pronounced in the open Court (vide separate order) ORDER Invoking the provisions U/S 232 of Cr.P.C., Accused is acquitted for the offences punishable U/Sec.324, 307 of IPC.
The bail bonds of accused and their sureties shall stand cancelled.
The articles seized in PF.No.23/201 dtd: 22.2.2021 of Halasuru Police Station being worthless, is ordered to be destroyed, after expiry of appeal period, if the same is not required for any other purpose.
[K.M. Rajashekhar], XXVIII. Addl. City Civil Judge, Mayo hall, Bangalore.
18 S.C.No.1466/2021