Bangalore District Court
State By vs 2. Pulsar Manja @ Manjunath S/O.Raju on 1 December, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE X ADDL.C.M.M.
MAYO HALL UNIT, AT BENGALURU
Dated: This the 1st day of December 2015
PRESENT: Sri.ARJUN.S.MALLUR,
B.A.L., LL.B.,
X Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bengaluru City.
C.C.No.22840/2010
Complainant - State by, Police Sub Inspector
R.M.Nagar Police Station
/vs/
Accused 2. Pulsar Manja @ Manjunath S/o.Raju,
19 yrs. No.40, 5th Cross, Azadnagar,
Chamrajpet, Bengaluru.
7. Ranjith @ Appaji S/o.late Jayaram, 19
yrs. No.224/4, 4th Main, 4th Cross,
Kempe Gowdanagar, Bengaluru.
A.1, A.3 to A.6 are all Splitup.
JUDGMENT
1. The PSI of R.M.Nagar police station have filed this chargesheet against the accused Nos.1 to 7 for the offences punishable u/S.143, 144, 147, 448, 384, 506 r/w.511 r/w.149 of IPC.
2. It is alleged by the prosecution that the accused Nos.1 to 7 having common intention of extorting money from CW.1 on 20/4/2010 around 2.00 AM at No.2, Shiva Parvathi Nilaya, Gopalappa Layout, Kalkere, Bengaluru formed an unlawful assembly and being 2 CC No.22840/2010 members of unlawful assembly in furtherance of common object armed with deadly weapons wrongfully trespassed to the house of CW.1, caused rioting and attempted to extort sum of Rs.2 Lakhs from CW.1 and without there being any provocation threatened CWs.1 to 3 with life and thereby committed the alleged offences.
3. On the basis of the complaint filed by complainant, a case was registered in R.M.Nagar P.S., Cr.No.115/2010 and FIR was submitted to the court. Panchanama of scene of offence was conducted in presence of panchas and statement of witnesses were recorded. On completion of investigation chargesheet has been filed against the accused for the alleged offences.
4. Cognizance of offences was taken and summons was issued to the accused persons. Accused Nos.2 and 7 have appeared before the court through their counsel and have been released on bail. A.1, A.3 to A.6 remained absconded and case against them has been splitup. Copies of chargesheet were furnished to accused u/S.207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, charge were framed against the accused for the alleged offences and accused Nos.2 and 7 have pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
3 CC No.22840/2010
5. The prosecution in support of its case has examined 2 witnesses as PWs.1 and 2 and got marked 3 documents as Exs.P1 to P3. As no incriminating evidence found against the accused their statement u/S.313 of Cr.P.C. was dispensed with.
6. Heard the arguments of Sr.APP appearing for the state and the counsel for accused and perused the records.
7. The points for consideration is:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that the accused Nos.2 and 7 along with A.1, A.3 to A.6 having common intention of extorting money from CW.1 on 20/4/2010 around 2.00 AM at No.2, Shiva Parvathi Nilaya, Gopalappa Layout, Kalkere, Bengaluru formed an unlawful assembly and being members of unlawful assembly in furtherance of common object armed with deadly weapons wrongfully trespassed to the house of CW.1, caused rioting and attempted to extort sum of Rs.2 Lakhs from CW.1 and without there being any provocation threatened CWs.1 to 3 with life and thereby committed the alleged offences?
2. What order?
8. My answer on the above points:
Point No.1 - Negative, Point No.2 - As per final order, for the following;4 CC No.22840/2010
REASONS
9. POINT NO.1:
The prosecution in support of its case has examined two witnesses. PW.1 Smt.Sridevi and PW.2 Smt.Mamatha are the material witnesses. Both of them turned hostile to the prosecution denying any extortion of money from them by the accused persons. They have also denied any threat to their life by the accused persons. They have denied having made statements before the police under Exs.P1 and P3. PW.1 has also denied any mahazar drawn in her presence under Ex.P2. PWs.1 and 2 in their evidence have deposed having compromised the dispute with the accused. PWs.1 and 2 being the material witnesses having turned hostile and compromise being reported between the parties, the prayer of Sr.APP to summon and examine other chargesheet witnesses was refused. In view of the material witnesses turning hostile and compromise being reported between parties, it cannot be said that prosecution has been able to prove the alleged offences beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly, I answer Point No.1 in the Negative.
10. POINT NO.2:
For the afore said reasons, I pass the following; 5 CC No.22840/2010
ORDER U/s 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused Nos. 2 and 7 are acquitted of the alleged offences punishable u/S.143, 144, 147, 448, 384, 506 r/w.511 r/w.149 of IPC. Bail bonds of accused stand cancelled and they are set at liberty. Office is directed to retain the case papers and property till disposal of splitup chargesheet against A.1, A.3 to A.6.
(Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, same was corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 1st day of December 2015).
(ARJUN.S.MALLUR) X A.C.M.M., BENGALURU ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED Prosecution Defence PW.1 Smt.Sridevi. Nil PW.2 Smt.Mamatha.
Exhibits Marked Ex.P1 Complaint.
Ex.P1(a)Signature of PW.1.
Ex.P2 Mahazar.
Ex.P2(a)Signature of PW.1.
Ex.P3 Statement of PW.2.
Material Objects got marked
-Nil-
X A.C.M.M., Bengaluru.
6 CC No.22840/2010