Bangalore District Court
State By Parappana vs No.1 To 8 For The Offences Punishable ... on 3 January, 2022
1 CC No.9487/2018
IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, AT BANGALORE.
Dated this the 3rd day of January 2022
Present : Sri.Arun Sadashiv Gudigenavar,
B.A., LL.B., (Hon's) L.L.M.,
IX Addl.C.M.M., Bengaluru.
CC NO.9487/2018
1.C.C.No. 9487/2018
2.Date of offence 18/5/2017
3.Complainant State by Parappana
Agrahara Police Station.
4.Accused 1. Narayanaswamy Reddy
S/o.Late Hanumappa Reddy.
2. Vasanthamma
W/o.Narayanaswamy Reddy.
3. Shilpa Reddy
D/o.Narayanaswamy Reddy.
4. Sheela Reddy
D/o.Narayanaswamy Reddy.
2 CC No.9487/2018
5. Jayarama Reddy
S/o.Late Hanumappa Reddy.
6. Sarasamma
W/o.Jayarama Reddy.
7. Ashwini Reddy
D/o.Jayarama Reddy.
8. Sashidhara Reddy
S/o.Jayarama Reddy.
All R/No.47/1A, LHR Layout,
Govindashettypalya,
Electronic City, Bengaluru.
5. Offences U/Sec. 341, 342, 323, 384, 386 and
complained of 506 r/w 34 of IPC.
6.Plea Accused No.1 to 8 pleaded not
guilty.
7.Final Order Accused No.1 to 8 are acquitted.
8.Date of Order 03-01-2022.
JUDGMENT
The Police Sub-Inspector of Parappana Agrahara Police Station, Bengaluru has filed this charge sheet against the accused No.1 to 8 for the offences punishable u/Sec. 341, 342, 323, 384, 386 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC.
3 CC No.9487/2018
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:
It is the case of the prosecution that the husband of CW.1 Late H.Gopal Reddy was the owner of property bearing Sy.No.47/1A of Govindashettypalya. Further it is the case of the prosecution that the accused No.1 to 8 in order to grab the said property filed suit in OS No.1961/2015. It is also the case of the prosecution that on 21/8/2016 at around 10.00 pm the accused No.1 to 8 in the guise of resolving the dispute called CW.1 and 2 to their house and wrongfully restrained and confined them in a separate room till 5.30 pm. Thereafter, accused No.1 assaulted with his hands on the face of CW.1 and accused No.2 dragged CW.1 and accused No.3 and 4 also assaulted CW.1. Accused No.6 and 7 assaulted CW.1 and accused No.2 kicked CW.2 on his back and also gave life threat to them. Further it is the case of the prosecution case that accused No.1 to 8 forcibly obtained the signature of CW.1 on blank cheques. In this regard CW.1 lodged private complaint 4 CC No.9487/2018 before this Court and the same has been referred to the police for investigation. Based on the same FIR came to be registered in Crime No.255/2017 for the offences punishable u/Sec. 341, 342, 323, 384, 386 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC. Thereafter, CW.10 conducted investigation and filed charge sheet for the offences punishable u/Sec. 341, 342, 323, 384 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC against the accused No.1 to 8.
3. After filing of the charge sheet this Court has taken the cognizance of the offences punishable u/Sec. 341, 342, 323, 384 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC against the accused No.1 to 8 and issued summons to them. The accused No.1 to 8 have appeared before this Court through their counsel and obtained bail. The copy of the charge sheet has been furnished to the accused No.1 to 8 as per Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing both sides the charge has been framed and read over to accused No.1 to 8. But they have pleaded not guilty and 5 CC No.9487/2018 claimed to be tried. Hence, the case has been posted for prosecution evidence.
4. The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined in all 3 witnesses as PW.1 to PW.3 and got marked 3 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3. Thereafter, the statement of the accused No.1 to 8 u/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded. They have denied the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution evidence. But they have not chosen to adduce any defence evidence.
5. I have heard the arguments of both sides. Perused the entire oral evidence and documents placed on record.
6. The points that arise for my consideration are as under:
(1)Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 21/8-2016 at around 10.00 am the accused No.1 to 8 in their house in furtherance of common intention voluntarily obstructed CW.1 and CW.2 from proceeding in any direction in which 6 CC No.9487/2018 they have right to proceed and thereby committed an offence punishable u/Sec. 341 r/w 34 of IPC ?
(2) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place the accused No.1 to 8 in their house in furtherance of common intention wrongfully restrained CW.1 and CW.2 in a separate room and thereby committed an offence punishable u/Sec.342 r/w 34 of IPC ?
(3) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place the accused No.1 to 8 in furtherance of common intention assaulted CW.1 and CW.2 and caused bodily pain and thereby committed an offence punishable u/Sec.323 r/w 34 of IPC ?
(4) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place the accused No.1 to 8 in furtherance of common intention gave life threat to CW.1 and 2 and thereby committed an offence punishable u/Sec.506 r/w 34 of IPC ?
(5) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place the accused No.1 to 8 in furtherance of common intention put CW.1 and CW.2 in fear of injury and got delivered signed blank cheques from them and thereby committed an offence punishable u/Sec.384 r/w 34 of IPC ?7 CC No.9487/2018
(6)Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place the accused No.1 to 8 in furtherance of common intention put CW.1 and CW.2 in fear of death or of grievous hurt while committing extortion and thereby committed an offence punishable u/Sec.
386 r/w 34 of IPC ?
(7)What order ?
7. My findings to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 to 6 : In the Negative, Point No.7 : As per final order, for the following :
REASONS
8. Point No.1 to 6:- These six points are taken together for common discussion as they are arising out of same incident and also to avoid repetition of facts and evidence.
9. It is the case of the prosecution that the husband of CW.1 Late H.Gopal Reddy was the owner of property bearing Sy.No.47/1A of Govindashettypalya. Further it is the case of the prosecution that the accused No.1 to 8 in order to grab the said property filed suit in OS NO.1961/2015. It is also the 8 CC No.9487/2018 case of the prosecution that on 21/8/2016 at around 10.00 pm the accused No.1 to 8 in the guise of resolving the dispute called CW.1 and 2 to their house and wrongfully restrained and confined them in a separte room till 5.30 pm. Thereafter, accused No.1 assaulted with his hands on the face of CW.1 and accused No.2 dragged CW.1 and accused No.3 and 4 also assaulted CW.1. Accused No.6 and 7 assaulted CW.1 and accused No.2 kicked CW.2 on his back and also gave life threat to them. Further it is the case of the prosecution case that accused No.1 to 8 forcibly obtained the signature of CW.1 on blank cheques. In this regard CW.1 lodged private complaint before this Court and the same has been referred to the police for investigation. As already stated supra, the prosecution has examined in all 3 witnesses as PW.1 to PW.3 and got marked 3 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.3.
10. PW.1 Babu is the Investigation Officer who filed the 9 CC No.9487/2018 charge sheet against the accused No.1 to 8. He has deposed that he received private complaint from the Court and based on the same registered FIR as per Ex.P.2. On the very same day he visited the spot and drawn panchanama as per Ex.P.3 in the presence of witnesses. Further he has deposed that on 19- 5-2017 he recorded the further statement of complainant and also recorded the statements of witnesses and thereafter completed the investigation and filed the charge sheet.
11. PW.2 Manu Kumar is shown as eye witness. He has deposed that on 21/8/2016 accused No.1 to 5 requested him and CW.1 to come to their house for discussing about their properties. Further he has deposed that by considering their request he and CW.1 went to the house of accused No.1 to 5 and there accused wrongfully confined him in a separate room and also confined CW.1 in another room and thereafter they all went to their house forcibly took the documents related to 10 CC No.9487/2018 properties and two cheques. Further he has deposed that in this regard CW.1 gave complaint against the accused.
12. PW.3 Veeresh H N is a police official and he has deposed about submitting his report to the Investigation Officer with respect to efforts made by him in searching accused No.1 to 8.
13. It is relevant to note that in spite of execution of proclamation against CW.3, CW.4, CW.5, CW.7 and CW.8 they have not been secured before this Court . Hence, they have been dropped out. Further it is relevant to note that in spite of issuance of witness warrant to CW.1, CW.9 and PW.2 through Deputy Commissioner of Police, they have not been secured before this Court. It is relevant to note that CW.1 to CW.6 are material witnesses. The non-examination of material witness is fatal to the prosecution case. The evidence of PW.1 and PW.3 are not sufficient to prove the guilt of accused No.1 to 8. 11 CC No.9487/2018 Therefore, in my opinion the prosecution has failed to prove the ingredients of the alleged offences punishable u/Sec. 341, 342, 323, 384, 386 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 to 6 in the negative.
14. Point No.7: For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 to 8 are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable u/Sec. 341, 342, 323, 384, 386 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC.
The bail bonds and surety bonds of accused No.1 to 8 stands cancelled.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected directly on computer and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 3rd day of January 2022. ).
(Arun Sadashiv Gudigenavar) IX Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.12 CC No.9487/2018
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:
PW.1: Babu S PW.2: Manu Kumar PW.3: Veeresh H N.
List of documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:
Ex.P.1 : Complaint Ex.P.1(a): Signature of PW.1 Ex.P.2: FIR Ex.P.2(a): Signature of PW.1 Ex.P.3: Mahazar Ex.P.3(a): Signature of PW.1.
List of material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:
- NIL -
List of witnesses examined on behalf of the defence:
- NIL -
List of documents and materials marked on behalf of the defence:
- NIL -
IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bengaluru.13 CC No.9487/2018
Judgment pronounced in the Open Court (Vide separate order) ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 to 8 are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable u/Sec. 341, 342, 323, 384, 386 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC.
The bail bonds and surety bonds of accused No.1 to 8 stands cancelled.
IX ACMM, Bengaluru.14 CC No.9487/2018
ORDER The counsel for the accused No.1 to 8 has filed application u/Sec.362 of Cr.P.C. seeking this Court to make necessary corrections occurred in the judgment dated 03-01-2022.
2. He has submitted that the name of father of accused No.1 is shown as Late Hanumappa instead of Late Hanumappa Reddy. Similarly, the name of father of accused No.5 is shown as Narayanaswamy Reddy instead of Late Hanumappa Reddy. Similarly, the name of husband of accused No.6 is shown as Narayanaswamy Reddy instead of Jayarama Reddy. Further he has submitted that the name of father of accused No.7 and 8 is shown as Narayanaswamy Reddy instead of Jayarama Reddy.
3. I have perused the judgment dated 03-01-2022 passed by this Court and also perused the entire charge sheet. It prima-facie appears that there is a clerical error occurred in the cause-title of the judgment. Hence, it is necessary to alter the same. With these, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The application filed by the counsel for accused No.1 to 8 is hereby allowed.
The judgment dated 03-01-2022 stands altered in the following manner.15 CC No.9487/2018
1. The name of the father of accused No.1 is altered as Late Hanumappa Reddy.
2. The name of the father of accused No.5 is altered as Late Hanumappa Reddy.
3. The name of the husband of accused No.6 is altered as Jayarama Reddy.
4. The name of father of accused No.7 and 8 is altered as Jayarama Reddy.
IX ACMM, Bengaluru.