Bangalore District Court
Manbar Bairagi vs Afjal Khan on 29 January, 2026
KABC030936822019
IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 29th day of January 2025
PRESENT: SRI.MANJUNATHA.K.P,
B.A.L., LL.B.,
I Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru
C.C.No.30205/2019
COMPLAINANT :- State by Sadashivanagara Police
Station
(By Sr.APP)
ACCUSED :- A1. Apzal Khan S/o. Pachalal Aged
about 33 years, R/at No. Nil, Adhi
Masidhi, 11th Cross, Ayyappa nagara
circle, K.R. Puram, Bengaluru
A2. Saleem pasha S/o. Riyaz pasha
Aged about 24 years, R/at No.Nil, 11th
'D' Cross, Padarayanapura, J.J.
Nagara, Bengaluru.
A3. Salman Pasha (Split-up),
2
C.C.No.30205/2019
A4. Bashir Sab (Split-up)
A5. Sardar @ Shaik Sardar (Split-up)
A6. Babu S/o. Jayappa Aged about 43
years, R/at No. 33, 2nd Cross, Cristin
Colony, Sriramapura, Bengaluru
A7. Parveez khan @ Pramod S/o. Raju
Aged about 35 years, R/at No. 534, 1st
Main, 1st Cross, Gangondanahalli,
Chandralayout, Bengaluru
A8. Imran Khan S/o. Alikhan Aged
about 23 years, R/at No. 534, 1st Main,
1st Cross, Gangondanahalli,
Chandralayout, Bengaluru
A9. Apnan Pasha @ Apu S/o. Late
Sultanpasha Aged about 22 years, R/at
No. 328, 4th Cross, Gangondanahalli,
Chandralayout, Bengaluru
(By Haribabu K.C., Adv.,)
JUDGMENT
This final report filed by the Vyalikaval police station against the accused no. 1, 2, 6 to 9 for the offences punishable U/s.457, 380, 511 of IPC.
2. BRIEF FACTS :- Case of the prosecution is that on 22.07.2019 in between 12.30 to 1.00 A.M at house No.205, 1st Floor, 2nd Main Road within the 3 C.C.No.30205/2019 jurisdictional limits of Sadashivanagara Police Station accused no. 1, 2, 6 to 9 along with other accused with common intention have trespassed by entering into the house of CW.1 by break opening the door lock and have attempted to commit theft in the house of CW.1.
3. During pendency of the trial, the presence of accused No.3 to 5 was not secured in spite of repeated issuance of summons and warrants. Hence, case against accused No.3 to 5 is split-up and the present case is continued only against the accused No.1, 2 and 6 to 9.
4. Based on the information of CW-1, the police have registered the case, investigation was conducted and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet filed against the accused are stating that they have committed the aforesaid offences.
5. The accused no.1, 2, 6 to 9 have entered appearance in response to the summons and has been enlarged on bail. The prosecution papers has been 4 C.C.No.30205/2019 supplied to the accused no. 1, 6 to 9. After hearing the charge is read over and explained to the accused to which they pleaded not guilty and claimes to be tried.
6. The prosecution has examined CW.1/PW.1 Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3 documents are exhibited.
7. The statement under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C., was dispensed, because, in no incriminating evidence for accused.
8. Heard the arguments. Perused the documents on record.
9. The following points that arise for my consideration:-
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 22.07.2019 in between 12.30 to 1.00 A.M at house No.205, 1st Floor, 2nd Main Road within the jurisdictional limits of 5 C.C.No.30205/2019 Sadashivanagara Police Station accused no. 1, 2, 6 to 9 along with other accused with common intention have trespassed by entering into the house of CW.1 by break opening the door lock thereby committed an offence punishable U/sec.457 of IPC ?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the above mentioned date, time and place the accused No.1, 2, 6 to 9 along with other accused with common intention have attempted to commit theft in the house of CW.1 and thereby committed an offence punishable U/s.380, 511 of IPC ?
3. What order?
10. For the reasons to be stated herein after, I answer the above points as follows:
Point No.1 & 2 - In the Negative
Point No.3 - As per the final order
for the following:-
6
C.C.No.30205/2019
REASONS
11. Point No.1 and 2:- These points are
connected with each other, hence they have taken up together for common discussion to avoid brevity.
12. In the instant case PW.1 is the complainant who has testified that he does not know anything about this case. That he has not given the complaint as per Ex.P.1 in this regard. Although PW.1 subscribes to his signatures appearing in the complaint at Ex.P.1 and mahazar at Ex.P.2, Ex.P.3 and 4 statement of complainant, he pleads ignorance to the contents of Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.4. PW.1 is turned hostile and cross- examined by the Ld.Sr.APP wherein nothing substantial is elicited in order to support the case of prosecution.
13. During the course of arguments Ld.Sr.APP and accused counsel argued as per the evidence and prays to dispose the case.
7
C.C.No.30205/2019
14. Further admittedly this case arise out of the complaint given by the complainant and the Investigation Officer filed charge sheet for the alleged offences and after framing the charge due to settlement of dispute between the complainant and accused, the complainant has turned hostile and in spite of cross- examination by the Ld.Sr.APP, PW.1 has not supported the prosecution case. So in the absence of incriminating evidence the other evidence of charge sheet witnesses is taken has dropped by rejecting the prayer of Ld.Sr.APP. Because on examination of other charge sheet witnesses, that too in the absence of incriminating evidence, in the evidence of PW.1 no purpose of prosecution case will survives, so in order to save the very precious time of this court and due to compromise of dispute between the parties, this court is the opinion that the evidence of other witnesses is not at all requires, accordingly by rejecting the prayer of Ld.APP the evidence of remaining witnesses taken as 8 C.C.No.30205/2019 nil and in the absence of incriminating evidence, the statement U/s.313 of Cr.P.C is dispensed with and then case is posted for arguments.
15. Further this court was of the opinion that PW.1 is the material witness who has compromised with the accused and therefore the remaining witnesses were dropped by rejecting the prayer of Ld.Sr.APP.
16. On considering the evidence of PW.1 the complaint at Ex.P.1, the evidence of PW.1 appears to be contradictory. The evidence of PW.1 is inconsistent with Ex.P.1. PW.1 admitted to have compromised with the accused. Therefore, I hold that the prosecution is unable to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, the accused deserves to be acquitted. Therefore, I answer points No.1 and 2 in the NEGATIVE.
9
C.C.No.30205/2019
17. Point No.3: From the discussions on foregoing points, this court opined that prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused no.1, 2, 6 to 9 punishable under the alleged sections 457, 380, 511 of Indian Penal Code. Therefore, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Accused no. 1, 2, 6 to 9 are not found guilty. Acting U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C., I hereby ACQUIT the accused of the offences punishable U/sec.457, 380, 511 of IPC.
The bail bond of the accused no.1, 2, 6 to 9 stands cancelled.
The cash security offered by accused no.1, 2, 6 to 9 for their release on bail shall be refunded on proper identification, after appeal period is over.
(Dictated by me on computer, typed by the Typist-Copyist, same was corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 29thJanuary 2026). Digitally signed by KRISHNAPPA KRISHNAPPA PACHERAMALLI PACHERAMALLI MANJUNATHA MANJUNATHA Date: 2026.01.31 17:33:29 +0530 (Manjunatha.K.P) I ACJM, BENGALURU 10 C.C.No.30205/2019 ANNEXURES LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION :-
PW.1 Man Bairagi LIST OF EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION :- Ex.P.1 Complaint Ex.P.1(a) Signature of PW-1 Ex.P. 2 Mahazar Ex.P.2(a) Signature of PW-1
Ex.P.3 & 4 Further Statements of PW 1 Digitally signed by KRISHNAPPA KRISHNAPPA PACHERAMALLI PACHERAMALLI MANJUNATHA MANJUNATHA Date: 2026.01.31 17:33:39 +0530 (Manjunatha.K.P) I ACJM, BENGALURU 11 C.C.No.30205/2019 29.01-2026 State by APP Accused no.1, 2, 6 to 9 For Judgment (Judgment passed separately in the Open Court) ORDER Accused no. 1, 2, 6 to 9 are not found guilty. Acting U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C., I hereby ACQUIT the accused no. 1, 6 to 9 of the offences punishable 457, 380, 511 of IPC.
The bail bond of the accused no.1, 2, 6 to 9 stands cancelled.
The cash security offered by accused no.1, 2, 6 to 9 for their release on bail shall be refunded on proper identification, after appeal period is over.
I Addl.CJM 12 C.C.No.30205/2019