Bangalore District Court
The State Of Karnataka vs Mohammed Umar Sharif on 27 July, 2022
0 S.C.No.726/2015
KABC010144542015
IN THE COURT OF THE LVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (C.C.H.57)
:PRESENT:
Sri. T.Govindaiah, B.Com., LL.B.,
LVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
Dated this the 27th Day of July, 2022.
S.C No.726/2015
COMPLAINANT : The State of Karnataka,
By Pulakeshi Nagar, police station,
Bengaluru.
(By Public Prosecutor)
V/s
ACCUSED 1. Mohammed Umar Sharif
S/o Mohammed Sharif
Aged about 26 years
R/at No.23, 2nd Cross,
Dhanakoti Lain,
Near Bengaluru Medicals
Shivajinagar,
Bengaluru
2. Rahil Ahamed @ Rahil
S/o Riyaz Ahammed
(A2 is split up as
CC.No.52425/2015)
1 S.C.No.726/2015
3. Abrar Sultan @ Ravi
S/o Rafi
Aged about 27 years
R/at C/o Rehaman
3rd cross,
near Government Urdu School,
Goa Garden, D.J.Halli,
Bengaluru
4. Khan
5. Dhada
(charge sheet against A4 and 5 have
filed separately)
(By Sri.S.K.P. advocate for A1
Sri.P.Y.R advocate for A3)
14.06.2013
Date of offence
Date of report of offence 15.06.2013
Name of the complainant Mohammed Fardeen
Date of commencement of
recording of evidence 02.11.2017
25.03.2019
Date of closing of evidence
U/Sec.120B, 341, 364A, 384,
Offences complained of 506, 324 R/w Sec.34 of IPC.
Opinion of the Judge Accused No. 1 and 3 are acquitted
Learned Public Prosecutor
State represented by
Sri.S.K.P. advocate for A1
Accused defended by Sri.P.Y.R advocate for A3)
A2,4 and 5 are split up
2 S.C.No.726/2015
JUDGMENT
This is a charge sheet presented by the police Sub inspector of Pulakeshi Nagar police station against the accused for the offences punishable under Sec120B, 341, 364A, 384, 506, 324 R/w Sec.34 of IPC.
2. The prosecution case is that: The accused No.1 to 4 have planned to rob the C.W.1 and committed wrongful assembly. On 14.06.2013 at bout 8.30 p.m the C.W.1 going towards Hyns Road in his Honda Activa bearing No.KA04HN3232, then the accused No.2 and 1 to 4 colluding with each other came near C.W.1. Then the accused No.2 and 3 restrained the C.W.1 from moving further and told him that they want to talk with him. Then the accused persons took C.W.1 in Maruti Swift Car bearing No.KA03MK7326 which is belongs to C.W.2 and took him near Ramanagar. All the accused persons extorted Rs.4,00,000/ by giving threat to C.W.1 of his life. Accused No.2 and 3 also abused the C.W.1 with filthy language and assaulted him with iron rod and wooden club and caused injuries. Thereby the accused committed aforesaid offences. 3 S.C.No.726/2015
3. Accused No.1 and 3 were facing trial in this case. The case against accused No.2, 4 and 5 are split up.
4. The investigating officer has submitted charge sheet before the IX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru who has committed the case to the Hon'ble Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge and then this case has been made over to this court for disposal in accordance with law.
5. After hearing both prosecution and accused before charge, charge was framed against the accused No.1 and 3 under Sec.120B, 341, 364A, 384, 506, 324 R/w Sec.34 of IPC. The same is read over and explained to the accused in the language known to them. To which the accused No.1 and 3 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6. In order to prove the prosecution case, 7 witnesses have examined as P.Ws.1 to 7 and got marked Ex.P.1 and 9 and got identified M.O.1 to 3. After closing of the prosecution side evidence the accused statement under section 313 Cr.P.C has been recorded. After knowing the same, the accused 1 and 3 have denied all the incriminating materials 4 S.C.No.726/2015 and circumstances as false and accused No.1 and 3 have submits no defence evidence.
7. Heard the arguments of both sides.
8. The points that arise for my consideration are :
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.1 and 3 by colluding with other accused wrongfully restrained the C.W.1 and kidnapped in a Maruthi Swift car bearing No.KA03MK 7326 and took him to Ramanagar wherein the accused extorted an amount of Rs.20,000/, one ring, cheque leafs, watch, purse and mobile from the C.W.1 and thereby committed offence under Sec. 364(A) and 384 R/w Sec.34 of IPC ?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused wrongfully restrained C.W.1 from moving further when he was proceeding Hains Road on his Honda Active bearing No.KA04HN 3232 and thereby committed the offence punishable Sec.341 R/w Sec. 34 of IPC.?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.2 and 3 conspired with each other with common intension wrongfully restrained C.W.1 to rob him and thereby committed the offence punishable under Sec.120B R/w 34 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 to 4 with common intention voluntarily caused 5 S.C.No.726/2015 simple hurt to C.W.1 by means of iron rod and wooden club and thereby committed the offence punishable under Sec.324 R/w Sec.34 of IPC?
5. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 colluding with other accused persons with common intention criminally intimidated C.W.1 with a treat to his life and thereby committed the offence punishable under Sec.506 R/w Sec.34 of IPC?
6. What order?
9. My answer to the above points are as under: Points No.1 to 5 : In the Negative.
Point No.6 : As per final order,
for the following:
:REASONS:
10. Points No.1 to 5: Since all the points are interconnected to each other they are taken together for discussion in order to avoid repetition of the facts and findings to be given there under.
11. In order to prove the prosecution case, the prosecution have examined 7 witnesses as P.W.1 to 7 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 9 and got identified M.Os.1 to 3. 6 S.C.No.726/2015
12. C.W.1 Mohammed Fardeen the complainant is examined as P.W.4. This witness is the victim and also complainant. In his evidence he states that he was working as a sale manager in a Metro Ford Company and earning an amount of Rs.40,000/. He daily used to proceed to work between 8.15 a.m. On 14.06.2013 between 5.15 a.m to 5.20 a.m when he proceed to his office one Umar Sharif who is also his friend standing in the back side of his house. Thereafter the complainant along with Umar Sharif when to tea shop, thereafter when he proceed to his office in his bike accused No.1 Umar Sharif and 3 other accused are standing near Swift car and stopped the complainant stating that they indent to purchase car and asked him to join them. Accordingly the accused took the complainant into the car and went to Ramanagar. Wherein all the accused have intentionally assaulted C.W.1 with hand and iron rod and forcibly took his ATM card, mobile and also took his ATM pin number. By using the said pin number the accused drawn an amount of Rs.1,25,000/ and they also demanded further amount of Rs.1,00,000/. Further the accused forcibly took 2 7 S.C.No.726/2015 blank cheque leafs and took the signature of C.W.1. Further the accused also drawn an amount of Rs.20,000/ by using another ATM card. Thereafter the accused left the C.W.1 in Ramanagar by giving an amount of Rs.200/ for his bus fair. Thereafter C.W.1 reached his home through KSRTC Bus. Further he informed the incident by using the phone of co passenger to his house. Thereafter he lodged the complaint as per Ex.P.3 and Ex.P.3(a) is his signature. He has also identified the accused No.1 and 3 before the court.
13. C.W.4 Manohar examined as P.W.1 who is the witness to the spot mahazar. P.W.1 has turned hostile and has not supported the case of prosecution. Further in the cross examination of P.W.1 made on behalf of the prosecution nothing is elicited to prove the Ex.P.1 panchanama and Ex.P.1(a) is his signature. Therefore the evidence of P.W.1 is not helpful to the case of prosecution.
14. C.W.10 Dr.Mohammed Mujtaf examined as P.W.5 who is the medical officer. In his evidence he states about giving of treatment to the victim and issuance of wound 8 S.C.No.726/2015 certificate as per Ex.p.5 and Ex.p.5(a) is his signature. The evidence of P.W.5 is formal one.
15. C.W.2 Feer Pasha who is owner of car bearing No.KA.03MK8326 examined as P.W.6. In his evidence he states that he is the owner of above said car. Accused No.1 took the said car stating that his brother not feeling well and he intend to take him to hospital to medical treatment. Thereafter he came to know about the act of accused and he released the car from the custody of the police through the order of the court.
16. C.W.7 Balanayak, C.W.11 Diwakar are the police officials they are examined as P.W.2 and 3. In their evidence they states about the arrest of accused seizure of M.O.1 to 3 from the custody of accused and they gave report as per Ex.P.2 and Ex.P.2(a) is the signature of P.W.2. They further states that as per the said report FIR has been registered as per Ex.P.4 and Ex.P.4(a) is the signature of P.W.3. They further states that, they have produced the accused and M.Os before IO. The evidence of P.W.2 and 3 are formal one. 9 S.C.No.726/2015
17. C.W.12 Shivakumar is examined as P.W.7 who is the investigating officer. In his evidence he received the report as per Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.1(c) is his signature. He further states that he also conducted the spot mahazar as per Ex.P.2. He further states that he conducted the seizure mahazar as per Ex.p.8 and Ex.P.8(a) is his signature. He further states that he also conducted another seizure mahazar as per Ex.P.9 and Ex.P.9(a) is his signature and he also states that seizure of M.O.1 to 3. In the evidence of P.W.7 he states that he recorded the voluntary statement of accused. Accordingly in the evidence of P.W.7 he states about registration of the case and investigation of the case. After completion of the investigation he filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Sec.120B, 341, 364A, 384, 506, 324 R/w Sec.34 of IPC.
18. From the above evidence of P.Ws.1 to 7 it is clear that the complainant and spot mahazar witness who are P.W.4 and 1 who are the material witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. In the medical evidence medical officer states about giving of treatment to the injured 10 S.C.No.726/2015 and issuance of wound certificate as per Ex.P.5. the evidence of P.W.5 is formal one. In the same manner P.W.2, 3 and 7 for the police officials. In their evidence they states about registration and investigation of the case. Their evidence is also formal one. Here in this case the prosecution fails to prove the seizure of M.O.1 to 3 and seizure mahazar through the consist and cogent material evidence. Therefore the prosecution fails to prove and establish the contents of seizure mahazar. When the prosecution fails to prove the seizure mahazar, a doubt arise in the mind of court regarding the seizure of M.O.1 to 3. Therefore the benefit of doubt is to be given to the accused. Except the evidence of P.W.1 there are no other material evidence to believe the prosecution case. Therefore the prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused through the considered and cogent material evidence. Accordingly the points are answered in the Negative.
19. Point No.6: In view of my findings on points No.1 to 5, this court proceed to pass the following: 11 S.C.No.726/2015 ORDER Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused No.1 and 3 are acquitted of the offences punishable under Section.120B, 341, 364A, 384, 506, 324 R/w Sec.34 of IPC.
The M.Os.1 to 3 are ordered to be retained for the split up case in C.C.No.52425/2015.
The bail bond and surety bonds stands cancelled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, corrected, and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 27th day of July , 2022) (T.Govindaiah) LVI Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
: ANNEXURE :
1. List of witnesses examined by prosecution.
P.W.1 C.W.4 Manohar
P.W.2 C.W.7 Balanayak
P.W.3 C.W.11 Diwakar
P.W.4 C.W.1 Mohammed Fardeen
P.W.5 C.W.10 Dr.Mohammed Mujatab
P.W.6 C.W.2 Peer Pasha
P.W.7 C.W.12 Shivakumar
2. List of witnesses examined by defence.
Nil 12 S.C.No.726/2015
3. List of documents marked by prosecution.
Ex.P.1 Spot mahazar
Ex.P.1(a) Signature of P.W.1
Ex.P.1(b) Signature of P.W.4
Ex.P.2 Report of P.W.2
Ex.P.2(a) Signature of P.W.2
Ex.P.2(b) Signature of P.W.7
Ex.P.3 Complaint
Ex.P.3(a) Signature of P.W.4
Ex.P.3(b) Signature of P.W.3
Ex.P.4 FIR
Ex.P.4(a) Signature of P.W.3
Ex.P.5 Wound certificate
Ex.P.5(a) Signature of P.W.5
Ex.P.5(b) Signature of P.W.7
Ex.P.6 and 7 Photos
Ex.P.6(a) and Negatives
7(a)
Ex.P.8 Seizure mahazar
Ex.P.8(a) Signature of P.W.7
Ex.P.9 Seizure Mahazar
Ex.P.9(a) Signature of P.W.7
4. List of documents by defence.
Nil
5. List of material objects marked by prosecution.
M.O.1 Silver ring
M.O.2 Amount of Rs.10,000/ (500 X20 )
M.O.3 Mobile phone with two sim cards
LVI Addl.City Civil & Sessions
Judge, Bengaluru.
13 S.C.No.726/2015
Judgment pronounced in the open
court (Vide separate order)
ORDER
Acting under Section 235(1) of
Cr.P.C., the accused No.1 and 3
are acquitted of the offences
punishable under Section.120B,
341, 364A, 384, 506, 324 R/w
Sec.34 of IPC.
The M.Os.1 to 3 are ordered to
be retained for the split up case
in C.C.No.52425/2015.
The bail bond and surety bonds
stands cancelled.
LVI Addl.City Civil & Sessions
Judge, Bengaluru.
14 S.C.No.726/2015