Bangalore District Court
State By Yelahanka New Town P.S vs Veerala Channaiah - Split Up on 12 July, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY
Dated this the 12th day of July 2016
PRESENT:
Sri Rudolph Pereira, B.Com., L L.M.,
CMM, Bengaluru
C.C. No.7794/2004
Complainant : State by Yelahanka New Town P.S.,
Bengaluru
-V/s-
Accused : 1. Veerala Channaiah - Split Up
2. Jayarama Naika - Abated
3. Teja w/o Ramesha, 24 yrs,
R/at No.359, 12th Main Road,
9th Cross, Ittumadu Village,
Bhuvaneshwarinagar,
Banashankari 2nd Stage, Bengaluru.
Date of offence : 28-11-2002 to 25-01-2003
(As per FIR)
Offence : U/S 420 R/W 34 IPC
Plea of the accused : Accused No-3 pleaded not
guilty
Final order : Accused No-3 Acquitted
Date of Judgment : 12-07-2016
2 CC No.7794/2004
J U D G M E N T U/S 355 of Cr.P.C.
The Sub-Inspector of Police, Yelahanka New Town
P.S., Bengaluru has charge sheeted the accused persons for
the offences punishable under Section 420 R/W 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the case of prosecution are that-
On 28-11-2002, the CW2 - I.B.Miskith, who was the
Motor Vehicle Inspector at R.T.O., Yeshwantpur, seized the
tractor bearing registration No.AP 27 T 454 and trailer
bearing registration No.AEE 7760, from the possession of
CW7 - Venkatesh. On 29-11-2002, he has again noticed that
CW8 - Rahamath Ulla is driving a tractor and trailer bearing
very same registration numbers belonging to the accused No-
3 at Doddaballapur Road. Hence, he has seized the said
second tractor and trailer also. During enquiry, it is noticed
that the accused No-1 to 3 in furtherance of common
intention and in order to cheat the government were using
two tractor and trailers with same registration numbers. He
has noticed that the vehicle seized from the possession of
3 CC No.7794/2004
CW8 is having fake registration number. During
investigation, the CW2 also noticed that the accused No-1 by
securing a duplicate R.C. book from the office of R.T.O.,
Guntur managed to sell the original tractor belonging to CW6
H.Narayanaswamy to the accused No-2 and in turn the
accused No-2 sold the said tractor to the accused No-3.
Further, the accused No-2 and 3 knowing fully well about the
above discrepancies were illegally using the said vehicles in
order to avoid payment of tax to the government. Thereby all
the accused persons have committed the offence of cheating.
3. The accused No-1 did not turn up before this court.
Hence vide orders dated 11-11-2009, the case against
accused No-1 was split up and a separate case in CC
No.31255/2009 is registered against him. The accused No-2
is reported to be dead. Hence, this case against accused No-2
was abated.
4. Accused No-3 is on bail. After furnishing charge-
sheet copies, my the then learned predecessor on the basis of
4 CC No.7794/2004
materials placed before the Court, has framed charge for the
alleged offence, and read over & explained in the language
known to accused No-3. Accused No-3 pleaded not guilty
and claimed to be tried.
5. The prosecution in order to prove its case has
examined in all nine witnesses as per PW1 to 9 before the
court and produced documents as per Ex.P1 to 31. CW12, 13,
16 and 17 are given up by the learned Sr.APP. CW5, 10, 15,
18 to 20 did not turn up before this court inspite of coercive
steps taken by this court. Hence by rejecting the prayer of
learned Sr.APP, this court dropped the above said witnesses,
in the interest of speedy justice to the accused No-3.
Thereafter the statement of accused No-3, as required U/S
313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein she denied the
incriminating evidence in toto and opted not to adduce any
defence evidence. The accused No-2 has adduced the
evidence of three witnesses as per DW1 to 3 and produced
documents as per Ex.D1 to 8.
5 CC No.7794/2004
6. Heard arguments of both sides.
7. Here in this case, the complainant B.Venkatesh being
then RTO has lodged complaint by stating that on 28-11-
2002 when the Motor Vehicle Inspector - CW2 Miskith was
inspecting the vehicles at Rajunukunte at about 2.45 pm, he
noticed a tractor bearing registration number AP 27 T 454
attached with trailer bearing registration number AAE 7766,
and when asked to produce the related documents pertaining
to said vehicle, the driver failed to produce the vehicle tax
receipt & other related documents, as a result of which
Inspection Report No.048/202 & Form No.27 was given,
vehicle was seized and given to the possession of
Rajanukunte P.S. It is also stated in the complaint that on 29-
11-2002 at about 11.45 am, when the said Motor Vehicle
Inspector was inspecting the vehicles near Yelahanka, at that
time, he saw another tractor attached with trailer holding the
same tractor & trailer registration numbers viz., AP 27 T 454
and AAE 7760, wherein he was surprised that though both
6 CC No.7794/2004
the above tractors and trailers are different vehicles, same
registration numbers has been given to both vehicles etc.,.
8. It is pertinent to note that, the prosecution has not
examined the complainant CW1. However, to prove its case
against accused CW6 Narayanaswamy s/o Hanumanthappa -
the contractor of Guddadahalli, Bengaluru is examined as
PW2, and he has stated in his chief examination that he
purchased a tractor from CW8 in the year 2001 pertaining to
Kolar District, and the said tractor is still today with his
possession. It is also stated that CW7 was appointed as
driver to the said tractor and it was sent from Doddaballapur
to Rajanukunte, for the purpose of loading jalli, wherein
CW7 came and reported that the RTO has seized the said
tractor and sent to Rajanukunte P.S. PW2 further deposed
that immediately he rushed to Rajanukunte P.S., wherein he
came to know that the RTO had informed them not to release
the vehicle for the reason that a case has been booked
inrespect of the same number vehicle at Yelahanka New
7 CC No.7794/2004
Town P.S. Later on, he went to Yelahanka New Town P.S.,
and found that the same number tractor was standing there,
and also learnt that the said vehicle was duplicate. He
deposed that the police had informed him that his vehicle was
to be sent for examination by FSL, hence he had left his
vehicle there, and identified the documents at Ex.P2 to 4.
9. During the cross-examination of PW2, he deposed that
as per the information of CW7 when he visited Rajunakunte
P.S., his vehicle was got seized by said police, wherein on the
said day he could not know that the tractor holding same
registration number is there, however he came to know the
same on next day, when he went to Yeshwantpur RTO.
Further, he has stated that he purchased his vehicle from one
person of Kolar District. The PW2 has denied that he being
politically influential person and on the guise of that he was
using the vehicle and avoided to pay tax to government and
by got influencing the RTO & police, he got registered a
false case against accused persons. At the end of his
8 CC No.7794/2004
evidence, he has disclosed that he has not read the contents of
Ex.P3 (mahazar) and he does not know the contents of Ex.P2
(statement dated 11-08-2003).
10. PW1 Venkatesh is CW7 of this case, and he is driver
of PW2. PW1 has stated that, in the year 2002, the RTO
officers have seized the tractor of PW2 for the reason that, he
failed to produce the documents sought for production,
wherein a notice was issued and he had handed over the same
to his owner. Further, he has stated that, as per the directions
of RTO, he had left the vehicle at Rajanukunte P.S. and
informed to his owner. PW1 has further stated that he doesn't
know the vehicle number, and that the police has equired
him. PW1 was treated as hostile by prosecution, but he
denied in his cross-examination that he has given statement
to police as per Ex.P1 to the effect that same registration
number tractor is in Yelahanka New Town and that he has
seen the same.
9 CC No.7794/2004
11. The seizure panchas viz., CW3 Venugopal and CW4
R.Shivashankar are got examined by prosecution as PW3 &
4, and they have stated that they have signed Ex.P5 - seizure
mahazar at Rajanukunte P.S. at the instance of police, they do
not know the contents of Ex.P5, they do not know as to what
the police have seized and that they have not given any
statements before police. PW3 & 4 have been treated as
hostile by prosecution and cross-examined, but nothing
substantial has been brought out in their cross-examination in
respect of Ex.P5.
12. PW5 Shivarudraiah is the then ASI of Yelahanka New
Town P.S., and he has deposed that on 29-11-2002 he
collected tractor No.AP 27 P 454 & trailer No.AEE 7760
along with Form No.27 from Yeshwantpur RTO Officers and
reported it to Station SHD, and identified the photos of
tractors & trailers as per Ex.P6 to 11. Further he has deposed
that he was deputed for tracing of accused, wherein he
reported as per Ex.P12 that the accused couldn't be traced.
10 CC No.7794/2004
PW5 has formally denied all suggestions of defence in his
cross-examination.
13. PW6 B.Puttabasavaiah - the Assistant Director of FSL
has stated in his chief examination that on 14-08-2003, a
requisition was forwarded to him for examination of the
engine numbers & chassis numbers of two tractors & trailers
relating to Crime No.18/2003 of Yelahanka New Town P.S.
It is also stated that both tractors and trailers had same
registration numbers. However, to find out the truth, he
examined the engine and chassis numbers by giving article
numbers as 1 & 2. PW6 has clearly stated that article No.1
tractor chassis number is carved on aluminium plate, which is
having engine number 3S 40973 and chassis number A
13408, but he has stated that he can't say the number of
trailer, which is of local manufacture. It is also stated that
article No.2 tractor chassis number and engine number are
tampered, and since the numbers are rubbed more, he can't
find out the real number and also can't find out the trailer
11 CC No.7794/2004
number, as the same is of local manufacture. It is also stated
that article number one tractor is belonging to CW6
Narayanaswamy and the same is original one and got
identified the photos at Ex.P13 to 19. Further stated that the
engine number and chassis number of article No.2 tractor are
tampered and got identified its digital photos at Ex.P20 to 28,
and also got identified his report as per Ex.P29.
14. During the cross-examination, PW6 has stated that the
digital photos are got snapped by their photographer
Gangaiah. It is also answered that tractor of Narayanaswamy
brought before the court is the original tractor. It is also
stated that he has adopted the scientific method examination
of Try's Reagant & Parcent HNO3 while testing the engine
number and Hume Rothery's & Villelas Reagant while
testing the chassis number.
15. PW7 Rahamathulla has stated in his evidence that he
had sold the tractor bearing registration number AP 27 T 457
& trailer number AAE 7760 to CW6 Narayanaswamy about
12 CC No.7794/2004
8 years back for Rs.1,35,000/-, wherein he had purchased the
same from one Veeralu Chennaiah of Andhra Pradesh. It is
further stated that he has also handed over the RC to CW6
Narayanaswamy, wherein he got transferred to his name.
16. PW8 Vijayakumar has stated that he being the driver
of tractor belonging to CW6 Narayanaswamy, in the year
2003, had taken the said tractor to Yelahanka P.S. and he
doesn't know as to police had prepared mahazar and seized
the same. However, when the prosecution has treated this
witness as hostile and subjected to cross-examination, he has
stated that it is true that on 11-08-2013, when he took the
tractor of Narayanaswamy to Yelahanka P.S., the police has
seized the same under mahazar. However, in the cross-
examination of defence, he has stated that he doesn't know as
to who has written the mahazar and its contents, and that he
has signed the mahazar at the instance of tractor's owner.
17. PW9 the Motor Vehicle Inspector has stated in his
evidence that he worked from June 98 to June 2000 in the
13 CC No.7794/2004
office of Yeshwantpur RTO office. Further he stated that on
28-11-2002 at about 2-45 pm, when he was checking the
vehicles at Doddaballapur Rajanukunte, found tractor bearing
number AP 27 T 454 & trailer bearing number AAE 7760,
and when checked the documents of said vehicle, the driver
Venkatesh s/o Muniyappa didn't produce documents.
Therefore the said vehicle was handed over to Rajanukunte
P.S. and its check report was submitted to their RTO office
with number 048202. Further it is stated that on 29-11-2002
at about 11.45 pm, when he was checking vehicles within the
limits of Yelahanka New Town P.S. at Doddaballapur Road,
he found another tractor & trailer having above said same
registration numbers, and when enquired about the
documents of vehicle with the driver Omprakash, he failed to
produce the same, and told that the vehicle belongs to
accused No-3 Teja, as a result of which the said vehicle was
handed over to Yelahanka New Town P.S. and its check
report was submitted to their RTO office with number
14 CC No.7794/2004
048204. Further, he has stated that to find out the original
owners of vehicles, the matter was brought to the notice of
CW1 Venkatesh - RTO through a report, wherein CW1 has
lodged complaint in Yelahanka New Town P.S., and PW9
has identified the documents at Ex.P4, 30 & 31.
18. During the cross-examination of PW9, he answered
that tractors & trailers number AP 27 T 454 & AAE 7760
were originally registered in the RTO office of Hanagal,
Andhra Pradesh, wherein the same were registered in the
name of one Veeranagachennaiah, but the documents could
not be traced as to who is the RC owner. In the further cross-
examination of PW9, he has admitted that when the vehicles
were to be transferred from one State to another State, NOC
& other related documents of vehicles will be verified and
also after personally verifying the vehicles, they will be
transferred. But he has very differently answered that he
can't say as to whether the both vehicles in question were
registered in Yeshwantpur RTO Office, Bengaluru or not,
15 CC No.7794/2004
and that he personally doesn't know the contents of Ex.P30,
31. Further, he has stated that, while seizing the vehicles in
question, mahazar is not prepared by him. Further, he has
admitted that, it would be difficult for him to identify as to
which vehicle is given to Yelahanka P.S., and which vehicle
is given to Rajanukunte P.S.
19. It is very necessary to discuss in this case that the
accused No-3 has not adduced any defence evidence. But the
accused No-2 has chosen to lead defence evidence to prove
that the very case of prosecution is false one and in support
of his claim he got examined in all three witnesses as per
DW1 to 3. Out of them, DW1 K.Inayathulla is the Senior
Assistant of RTO, Chittur and DW2 Janardhan Rao is the
then Superintendent of RTO, Guntur, from whom the defence
has got marked documents as per Ex.D1 to 6. On careful
consideration of the oral evidence of DW1 & 2, it is
appearing that tractor No. AP 27 T 454 & trailer No.AAE
7760 were registered in the RTO offices of Chittur and
16 CC No.7794/2004
Guntur of A.P. DW1 has deposed that prior to registration of
vehicles in question, the NOC, no due certificate, Form
No.29, 30 issued by Guntur RTO were taken and the same
were carefully scrutinized, and according to the records of
their office, the no due certificate belonging to vehicles are
issued by Jayanagar RTO office on 17-04-2001, wherein
accused No-2 Jayaram Naidu appears to be owner as per the
records. In his cross-examination by the learned Sr. APP,
DW1 has answered that he doesn't know the contents of
Ex.D2 & 3 etc.,.
20. DW2 has stated that according to the report at Ex.D4,
the tractor No.AP 27 T 454 & trailer No.AAE 7760 were
originally standing in the name of Veeralu Chennaiah,
wherein the NOC & CC were sent from Guntur RTO office
to Chittur RTO office. DW2 has further stated that before
making transfer from their office to Chittur RTO office, all
the taxes of vehicle was received. During the cross-
examination of DW2 by the learned Sr.APP, nothing is found
17 CC No.7794/2004
helpful to prove that Ex.D1 to 6 and oral evidence of DW1 &
2 are unbelievable. Furthermore, DW3 N.Srinivas, ARTO,
Bengaluru South has given his evidence stating that
according to the documents at Ex.D7 & 8, the tractors and
trailers seized in this case having registration numbers AP 27
T 0454 and trailer number AEE 7760 were originally
registered in the name of N.Jayarama Naidu at Chittur RTO
and now the said tractor and trailer is in the name of accused
Teja etc.,. DW3 has answered in his cross-examination of
learned Sr. APP that no documents are available in their
office to show that the said vehicle was registered in the
name of CW6 and that the said vehicle was seized from
CW6.
21. I have carefully gone through the evidence of
prosecution witnesses and defence witnesses, as well as the
suggestions/admissions given/came out in their cross-
examination, coupled with documents. It appears that there
is no sufficient evidence to bring home the guilt of accused
18 CC No.7794/2004
No-3 beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, I hold that
accused No-3 is entitled for the benefit of doubt. Since there
is no clear cut legal evidence to convict the accused No-3 for
the offence under Section 420 read with 34 of IPC, I proceed
to pass the following-
ORDER
The accused No-3 is found not guilty. Hence acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., she is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 420 R/W 34 IPC.
The bail bonds of accused No-3 shall stand cancelled and she is set at liberty. Keep the entire records with split up case in CC No.31255/2009, which is pending against accused No-1 on the file of this court.
(Dictated to the Stenographer on Computer. The computerized print out taken by him is revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this day i.e., 12-07-2016) (Rudolph Pereira), Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, BENGALURU.
19 CC No.7794/2004ANNEXURE List of Witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:-
PW1 : Venkatesh
PW2 : Narayanswamy
PW3 : Venugopal
PW4 : R.Shivashankar
PW5 : Shivarudraiah
PW6 : Putta Basavaiah
PW7 : Rahamath Ulla
PW8 : Vijaykumar
PW9 : J.B.Biskith (I.B.Miskith)
List of Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:-
Ex.P1 : Statement of PW1 Ex.P2 : Report Ex.P3 : Mahazar Ex.P4 : Notice Ex.P5 : Mahazar Ex.P6 : Statement of PW3 Ex.P7 to P11 : Photos Ex.P12 : Report of PW5 Ex.P13 to P28 : Photos Ex.P29 : Report of FSL Ex.P30 : Complaint Ex.P31 : Letter dated 11-04-2003 List of Material objects produced:-
NIL 20 CC No.7794/2004 List of Witnesses examined & documents marked on behalf of the defence:
Witnesses
DW1 : K.Inayathulla
DW2 : K.Janardhana Rao
DW3 : N.Srinivas
Documents
Ex.D1 : Authorization Letter
Ex.D2, 3 : 'B' Register Extracts
Ex.D4 : Report of DW2
Ex.D5, 6 : Guntur RTO Ledger
Extracts
Ex.D7, 8 : Register Extracts issued by
RTO, Jayanagar, Bengaluru South C.M.M., BENGALURU.21 CC No.7794/2004
12-07-2016 (Judgment pronounced in the open court vide separate sheets) ORDER The accused No-3 is found not guilty. Hence acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., she is acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 420 R/W 34 IPC.
The bail bonds of accused No-3 shall stand cancelled and she is set at liberty. Keep the entire records with split up case in CC No.31255/2009, which is pending against accused No-1 on the file of this court.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru