Bangalore District Court
State By Yashwanthpura P.S vs M.N.Ravikumar on 18 April, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE IV ADDL. C.M.M AT BANGALORE.
DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF APRIL 2015
PRESENT
Ms.S.L.Ladkhan, B.A., L.L.M.,
IV A.C.M.M. Bangalore
CC No. 9042/2012
Complainant : State by Yashwanthpura P.S.
V/s.
Accused : M.N.Ravikumar, 29 Yrs.,
S/o. Nageshwar,
R/a. No.249/17, 5th Main Road,
Gokula 1st stage, 2nd phase,
Gokula, Mattikere, Bangalore.
Permanent address:
Gopalapura Road,
Darji Colony, 4th cross,
Chitradurga.
JUDGMENT
The PSI, Yashwanthpura Police Station has filed the charge sheet in Crime No.346/2011 against accused alleged to have committed the offences punishable u/s.408, 420 of IPC.
2. The brief prosecution case is as follows :
The complaint came to be lodged by one Mr.M.B.Prabhu, District Manager of Bata India Limited alleging that the accused was working as a Shop Manager at a showroom situated at Yashwanthpur since October 2009. That, on 31.10.2011 an inventory of the cash and the stock was conducted as there was information regarding the
-2- CC 9042/2012 accused having misappropriated the amount. In the said inventory they found shortage of an amount of Rs.2,55,111.24 and stock of Rs.77,701.05. Totally an amount of Rs.3,32,812.89 was misappropriated by the accused. The accused admitted his guilt and as such this complaint came to be lodged on 2.11.2011 at about 1.15 p.m. that came to be registered in the above said crime number. The I.O. after investigation has filed the charge sheet against the accused for the above said offences. Cognizance was taken after filing of charge sheet.
3. Accused was produced before the court on 5.11.2011 and he was enlarged on bail by my predecessor in office on 8.11.2011. Provisions of Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. were duly complied.
4. My predecessor in office has heard on charges. Charges for the offences punishable u/s.408, 420 of IPC was recorded. Certificate reveals that, it was read over and explained to the accused in the language known to him. The accused has pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Hence summons were issued to the prosecution witnesses.
5. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused the prosecution in all has led in the evidence of PW1 to PW3 and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.4. Though sufficient opportunity was given prosecution has failed to secure CW1, CW4 to CW7, as such their evidence was dropped.
6. After conclusion of the prosecution evidence statement of the accused u/s.313 of Cr.P.C. by explaining incriminating evidence
-3- CC 9042/2012 available against him was recorded. Accused has denied it and led no defense evidence.
7. Heard arguments of both the sides. Perused the materials on record.
8. The following points arise for my consideration :
1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, accused being a Shop Manager at Bata Showroom at Yashwanthpur since October 2009 had misappropriated an amount of Rs.3,32,812.89 and thereby committed the offence punishable u/s.408 of IPC?
2) Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused being the Shop Manager of Bata Showroom at Yashwanthpur had misappropriated the said amount and cheated the complainant and thereby committed the offence punishable u/s.420 of IPC ?
3) What order ?
9. My findings on the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : In the negative.
Point No.2 : In the negative.
Point No.3 : As per the final order for the following:
REASONS
10. Point No.1 & 2 : As these points are inter-related, in order to avoid repetition of discussion they are taken together for common consideration. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused was
-4- CC 9042/2012 working as a Shop Manager at a showroom situated at Yashwanthpur since October 2009. That, on 31.10.2011 an inventory of the cash and the stock was conducted as there was information regarding the accused having misappropriated the amount. In the said inventory they found shortage of an amount of Rs.2,55,111.24 and stock of Rs.77,701.05. Totally an amount of Rs.3,32,812.89 was misappropriated by the accused. The accused admitted his guilt.
11. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has led in evidence of PW1 to PW3. PW1 and PW2 are the spot panchas, both of them have supported the prosecution case. Nothing material is elicited from their cross-examination.
12. The I.O. is examined as PW3, who has deposed the way in which he has conducted the investigation. PW3 categorically deposed that, on 2.11.2011 the complainant came and lodged the complaint as per Ex.P.2 and he has registered the case in the FIR Ex.P.3. He conducted the spot panchanama as per Ex.P.1 and the seizure panchanama as per Ex.P.4. PW3 in his cross-examination has deposed that, he has not mentioned the number of the currency notes in the said seizure panchanama and he has not verified the audit report and the calculation that was submitted by the accused at the time of taking the charge. Except the testimony of PW1 to PW3 the prosecution has failed to lead the evidence of the complainant. Prosecution has failed to prove the complaint as the complainant is not at all examined. Even though sufficient opportunity was given prosecution has failed to lead the evidence of CW4 to CW7 also.
-5- CC 9042/2012 Therefore, under these circumstances the prosecution has failed to prove the entrustment of the property to the accused. As such the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, my finding on the above points are in the negative.
13. Point No.3 : For having answered the above points as per the above discussion, I proceed to pass this following :
ORDER Acting U/s. 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. accused is acquitted of the offences punishable U/s.408, 420 of IPC.
As per the provisions of Sec.436A of Cr.P.C. bail bonds of the accused and surety stands cancelled after the expiry of 6 months. (Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed and computerised by her, corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 18th day of April 2015) (Ms. S.L.Ladkhan) IV Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for prosecution :
PW.1 : Girish Kumar
PW.2: Sunil Kumar
PW.3: Raghavendraiah
-6- CC 9042/2012
List of exhibits marked for prosecution :
Ex.P.1 : Spot panchanama Ex.P.2 : Complaint Ex.P.3 : FIR Ex.P.4 : Seizure panchanama List of M.O.s marked for prosecution : NIL List of witnesses and exhibits marked on behalf of accused : NIL (Ms. S.L.Ladkhan) IV Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.
-7- CC 9042/2012
18.04.2015
State by Sr.APP
Accused
For judgment
ORDER
(pronounced in open court vide separate order) Acting U/s. 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. accused is acquitted of the offences punishable U/s.408, 420 of IPC.
As per the provisions of Sec.436A of Cr.P.C. bail bonds of the accused and surety stands cancelled after the expiry of 6 months. (Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed and computerised by her, corrected by me and then th pronounced in open court on this the 18 day of April 2015) (Ms. S.L.Ladkhan) IV Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.
-8- CC 9042/2012