Bangalore District Court
The State Of Karnataka Through vs Unknown on 1 July, 2016
IN THE COURT OF XXIV ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURE
DATED THIS THE ....... DAY OF ....................2016
C.C. No.26290/2014
Present: SRI. CHINNANNAVAR R. S.
XXIV ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURE.
COMPLAINANT : The state of Karnataka through
Yeshwanthpura Police Station
(State by Sr. A.P.P.)
V/s.
ACCUSED :
Sandesh S/o. Ramappa,
Aged about 26 years,
R/o. No.32, A Main, 1st
Cross, Near
Choudeshwari Tmeple,
Mohankumar Nagar,
Bengaluru. Permanent
R/o. Maitani(S.Pal)
Village, Ramakrishnapura
Post, Tirtahalli Tq.,
Shivamogga.
(Reptd. by Sri.I.P., Advocate)
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT
OF OFFENCE : 30.04.2014
DATE OF ARREST
OF THE ACCUSED : Accused is on bail.
OFFENCE ALLEGED : U/s. 326 of IPC.
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT
OF EVIDENCE : 31.07.2015
DATE OF CLOSING OF
EVIDENCE : 06.06.2016
2 CC.NO.26290/2014
OPINION OF THE JUDGE : Found not guilty
(Chinnannavar R. S.)
XXIV A.C.M.M., BANGALORE.
-: J U D G M E N T :-
The PSI of Yeshwanthpura Police Station has filed charge
sheet against accused for the offence punishable U/s. 326 of
IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under:
It is alleged that, accused and CW.2 were friends and
accused was insisting CW.2 to marry him and because of that on
30/04/2014 at 7.00 p.m. in front of classic tailor shop, 3rd cross,
9th main of Yeshwanthpur when CW.2 and 3 were proceeding on
road accused thrown boiled oil on the face of CW.2 by insisting
her to marry him and thereby caused grievous injuries on her
face and committed offences punishable U/s. 326 of IPC.
3. The first information was filed by the complainant
B.Satish S/o. C. Babu (brother of Cw.2) on 01/05/2014 at 1.00
p.m. before PSI of Yeshwanthpura police station with above said
allegations. On the basis of written complaint PSI registered in
crime No.187/2014 for the offence U/s. 326 of IPC and sent FIR
to the court, visited the spot, conducted spot panchanama,
seized Steel Plask containing oil from the spot, recorded
statements of witnesses, collected wound certificate and after
3 CC.NO.26290/2014
completion of investigation filed charge sheet against the
accused.
4. On perusing the charge sheet this court has taken
cognizance for the offence punishable U/s. 326 of IPC and
issued summons to the accused. During crime stage accused was
released on bail.
5. The copy of the charge sheet and other materials
has been supplied to the accused as required U/s. 207 of Cr.P.C.
6. After hearing both side the charge for the offence
punishable U/s. 326 of IPC was framed & read over to the
accused in the language known to him. He denied the charge and
claimed trial.
7. In order to prove the case the prosecution has
examined complainant as PW.1 and victim as PW.2 and got
marked Ex.P.1 and Ex.P.2. The prayer of the Sr. A.P.P. to issue
summons to other witnesses has been rejected by this court on
the ground that, PW.1 being complainant/material witness and
PW.2 being victim have turned hostile and also on the ground
that, no purpose will be served if other witnesses are examined.
8. The 313 Cr.P.C. statement has been dispensed with
since there was no incriminating evidence against the accused.
9. I have heard the learned Sr. A.P.P. and learned
defense counsel.
4 CC.NO.26290/2014
10. The following point arises for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable
doubt that, accused and CW.2 were friends and
accused was insisting CW.2 to marry him and because
of that on 30/04/2014 at 7.00 p.m. in front of classic
tailor shop, 3rd cross, 9th main of Yeshwanthpur when
CW.2 and 3 were proceeding on road accused thrown
boiled oil on the face of CW.2 by insisting her to marry
him and thereby caused grievous injuries on her face
and committed offences punishable U/s. 326 of
IPC ?
2. What order ?
11. My answer to the above points is as under;
Point No.1 - In the Negative.
Point No.2 _ As per final order for the following;
REASONS
POINT NO.1:
12. PW-1 being the complainant i.e. brother of the victim
and material witness has turned hostile. The learned APP cross
examined him at length and suggested the case of the
prosecution but he denied all the suggestions. He denied that,
he has given complaint before the police as per Ex.P.1. He
denied the contents of the complaint - Ex.P.1. He denied that,
accused has thrown boiled oil on CW.2. So nothing is elicited by
learned Sr. A.P.P. through the cross of the PW.1 to prove his
5 CC.NO.26290/2014
case. PW.2 is the victim and material witness to the case of the
prosecution. But she too has turned hostile. She denied that,
accused has thrown hot oil on her face and because of that she
sustained grievous injuries. She denied that, accused was
insisting her to marry him. So she denied entire case of the
prosecution and denied that, she has given statement before the
police as per Ex.P.3. PW.1 and 2 during their cross specifically
admitted that, they have entered compromise with the accused.
So it appears that, now complainant and accused have
compromised the dispute.
13. It is well settled position of law that, prosecution has to
prove its case beyond any reasonable doubt but the prosecution
has not all proved its case through the evidence of PW.1 and 2.
It is also well settled position of law that if there exists any
reasonable doubt in the case of the prosecution then the benefit
of the doubt shall be always given to the accused. In this case
there is no evidence against the accused. Hence I hold that,
prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and
I extend benefit of the doubt to the accused by answering point
No.1 in Negative.
POINT NO.2 :
14. In view of my answer to point No.1 in negative
accused is entitle for acquittal from the offences alleged. Hence I
proceed to pass the following:
6 CC.NO.26290/2014
ORDER
Acting U/s. 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is acquitted from the offences punishable U/s. 326 of IPC.
The bail bond of the accused and his surety stands cancelled after appeal period is over.
The case property i.e. Plask being worthless article shall be destroyed after appeal period is over.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected directly on computer and then pronounced by me in open court on this the ........ day of ...................., 2016) (Chinnannavar R. S.) XXIV A.C.M.M., BANGALORE.
ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the Prosecution:
PW-1 : Satish S/o. C. Babu PW-2 : Lavanya D/o. C. Babu Documents marked for the Prosecution:
Ex.P-1 : Statement of Complainant-PW.1 Ex.P-1(a) : Signature of PW.1 Ex.P-2 : Mahazar Ex.P-2(a) : Signature of PW.1 Ex.P-3 : Statement of PW.2 7 CC.NO.26290/2014 Witnesses examined for the accused:
-NIL-
Documents marked for the accused:
-NIL-
(Chinnannavar R. S.) XXIV A.C.M.M., BANGALORE.