Bangalore District Court
Lingaraja Pi vs Musthaq Ahammed on 30 October, 2024
KABC030778852015
IN THE COURT OF XLVI ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.
PRESENT : LOKESHA. C.N,
M.A., LL.,B.
XLVI Addl.C.J.M., Bengaluru.
C.C.No.27879/2015
30th day of October 2024
Complainant: State by - J.J.Nagar Police Station
(By A.P.P.)
V/s
Accused:
1. Mustak Ahamed, S/o. Mohammed Ghaus
52 years, R/o. No. 47, 6th Cross
Arafath Nagar, J.J. Nagar, Bengaluru.
2. Adil @ Matka Adil
34 years, R/o. 5th Cross,
Vinayaka Nagar
Halegudadha Halli, J.J.Nagar
Bengaluru.
(By Sri.Satheesh Kumar,. Advocate)
2
C.C.No.27879/2015
JUDGMENT
This is a charge sheet filed by J.J.Nagar Police station against the accused Nos.1 & 2 for the offence punishable Under Section 420 of IPC and U/Sec. 78(3) of Karnataka Police Act.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, on 28.09.2015 at 6.20 pm the Cw.1 CPI J.J. Nagar Police station received a credible information that a person is indulged in a O.C.Matka Gambling near Umar tea shop, west Padharayanapura Bridge, immediately after receipt of said information the Cw.1 secured two punch witnesses Cw.3 and 4 and rushed to the spot with Cw.5 and 6 and conducted a ride and apprehended the accused No.1 and seized an amount of Rs.2,900, 3 Matka Cheet and ball point pen. The accused No. 2, through accused No.1 with an intention to cheat the public involved in gambling. Thereafter in the presence of Cw. 3 and 4 the Cw.1 conducted a mahazer then lodged a complaint. On the basis of the complaint the Cw.7 registered a case recorded statements of witnesses, having completed the investigation filed the charge sheet against the accused persons for the aforesaid offences.
3. After filing of the charge sheet, the presence of the accused Nos.1 & 2 was secured, thereafter the copies of the charge sheet papers furnished to the accused persons and 3 C.C.No.27879/2015 after hearing both sides, the charges were framed, the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried for the said offences.
4. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused persons, the prosecution examined five witnesses as P.W.1 to Pw.5 and got marked document at Ex.P.1 to P.8. After completion of evidence of the prosecution the statement of accused persons recorded as required u/s 313 of Cr.P.C. The accused persons have denied the incriminating circumstances appeared against them in the evidence of prosecution and did not chose to lead the defense evidence.
5. I have heard the arguments from both sides and perused the entire record. In the facts and circumstances of the case the following points arises for consideration.
POINTS Point No.1: Whether the prosecution proves an offence punishable Under Section 420 of IPC against the accused Nos.1 & 2 beyond all reasonable doubt?
Point No.2: Whether the prosecution proves an offence punishable Under Section 78(3) of Karnataka Police Act against the accused Nos.1 & 2 beyond all reasonable doubt?
4C.C.No.27879/2015
6. Point No.1 & 2 under consideration are answered in the Negative for the following:
REASONS Point No.1 & 2
7. These points are inter-related; hence I have discussed them together to avoid repetition of facts and evidence, the PSI of J.J.Nagar police station filed the charge sheet against the accused persons Under Section 420 of IPC and U/Sec. 78(3) of Karnataka Police Act.
8. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused Nos.1 & 2, the prosecution examined the Cw.1 as Pw.1. the Pw.1 deposed that on 28.09.2015 at 6.20 pm he received credible information that a person is indulged in O.C.Matka Gambling near a tea shop, west Padharayanapura. Then he rushed to the spot with punch witnesses and his staff Cw.2 to
6. Then conducted ride and apprehended the accused No.1 and seized an amount of Rs.2,190, Matka cheet and pen by conducting mahazer. Based on said information the Cw.7 registered a case and having completed investigation filed charge sheet.
9. In the present case the accused No.1 and 2 have taken specific defense by denying the case of the prosecution that they have not involved in any gambling and the police have not seized any amount or Matka Cheet from the accused No.1 and filed false case against the accused No. 1 and 2.
5C.C.No.27879/2015
10. In order to prove the seizer mahazer as per Ex.P.1, the prosecution as examined the punch witnesses as Pw.1 and 2. The Pw. 1 and 2 have turned hostile to the case of the prosecution and did not choose to support the case of the prosecution. The Pw.1 and 2 in their evidence have deposed that the police have not conducted any ride in their presence and they have not conducted any mahazer and not seized any thing in their presence. The Pw.2 and 3 have denied the contents of Ex.P.1. The prosecution examined the Cw.2 who is alleged to be eye witness and victim as Pw.3. But the Pw.3 has turned hostile to the case of the prosecution and did not choose the support the case of the prosecution. Though the Ld. APP treated the Pw.1 to 3 as hostile witnesses and conducted cross examination, but nothing has been elicited from the mouth of the Pw. 1 to 3. The Pw.3 also denied the drawing mahazer at spot.
11. The investigation officer Cw.7 examined as Pw.5. Though the Pw.5 deposed that he received complaint from the Cw.1 and registered an FIR and recorded the statement of witnesses by receiving the mahazer, but the Pw.5 did not tender himself for cross examination and further chief examination by the prosecution. Upon perusal of the evidence deposed by the prosecution witnesses, it is clear that except the evidence of Pw.1, non of the independent witnesses support of the case of the prosecution. There is no any corroborative evidence to support the version of the Pw.1.
6C.C.No.27879/2015 Hence there is no any corroborative evidence to support the evidence of Pw.1. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove the Ex.P1. There is no any evidence to show that the accused No. 1 and 2 are involved in a O.C.Matka gambling and committed cheating with the Cw.2. Therefore, prosecution has failed to prove the guilty of the accused Nos.1 & 2 beyond all reasonable doubt. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 & 2 in the Negative and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Exercising the power under section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. the accused Nos.1 & 2 are acquitted of the offences punishable Under Section 420 of IPC and U/Sec. 78(3) of Karnataka Police Act.
The bail bond and surety bonds stands continued another six months.
(Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed and computerized by her corrected by me and then pronounced the judgment in the open court on 30th day of October 2024.) (LOKESHA.C N) 46th Addl.C.J.M.,Bengaluru.
7C.C.No.27879/2015 ANNEXURE The witnesses examined for the prosecution:
PW1 : Mohammed Noushad PW2 : Ajaz PW3 : Babu PW4 : Lingaraju PW5 : Narasimha Battachar
The documents exhibited for the prosecution:
Ex.P1 : Panchanama Ex.P.1(a) : Signature Ex.P.2 : Statement Ex.P2(a) : Signature Ex.P3 : Complaint Ex.P4 : FIR Ex.P.5 to 8: Matka Cheet.
List of material objects marked for the prosecution:
- NIL -
The witnesses and documents exhibited for the defense:
- NIL -Digitally signed by LOKESHA C N
LOKESHA C N Date: 2024.11.04 13:50:10 +0530 (LOKESHA.C.N) 46th Addl.C.J.M.,Bengaluru.