Bangalore District Court
State By vs Raghava Reddy @ Vijay Raghava Reddy on 16 September, 2022
1 CC.No.52477/2016
IN THE COURT OF THE X ADDL.C.M.M.
MAYO HALL UNIT, AT BENGALURU
Dated: This the 16th day of September 2022
PRESENT: Smt.ARATI B.KAMATE
B.A., LL.B.,
X Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bengaluru City.
C.C.No. 52477/2016
Complainant - State by, Police Sub Inspector
K.R Puram Police Station
/vs/
Accused Raghava Reddy @ Vijay Raghava Reddy
S/o Venkataram Reddy, 56 yrs. No.58,
Hoodi Ayyappanagar, K.R.pura, Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
1. The PSI of K.R Puram police station has filed this charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable u/S. 324, 504 of IPC.
2. It is alleged by the prosecution that on 7/7/2014 at about 4.00 AM at No.61/B, Hoodi village, near Muniswamy Reddy compound, K.R.Pura, Bengaluru accused was pelting stones on the house of CW.1. When CW.1 questioned regarding the same, the accused abused her in filthy language and assaulted her with Stone over her head voluntarily causing simple injuries. Hence, it is alleged that accused has committed the alleged offences.
2 CC.No.52477/2016
3. On the basis of the FIS lodged by the informant, case was registered against the accused in K.R Puram P.S., Cr.No.379/2014 and FIR was submitted to the court. On completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed against the accused for the alleged offences.
4. Cognizance of offence was taken and summons was issued to the accused. Accused appeared before the court through his counsel and he is on bail. Copy of chargesheet was furnished to accused u/S.207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, charge was framed against the accused for the alleged offences. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. The prosecution in support of its case has examined 3 witnesses as PW.1 to 3, got marked 4 documents as Ex.P1 to 4. The statement of the accused was recorded u/S.313 of Cr.P.C. He denied the incriminating materials available against him. He got marked documents at Ex.D1 and 2.
6. Heard the arguments of Sr.APP appearing for the state and the counsel for accused and perused the records.
7. The following points arise for determination:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on 7/7/2014 at about 4.00 AM at No.61/B, Hoodi village, near Muniswamy Reddy compound, K.R.Pura, Bengaluru accused was pelting stones on the house of CW.1. When CW.1 questioned regarding the same, the accused abused her in filthy language. And thereby the accused has committed an offence punishable under Section. 504 of IPC?3 CC.No.52477/2016
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on the same date, time and place, accused assaulted her with Stone over her head voluntarily causing simple injuries. And thereby the accused has committed an offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC?
3. What order?
8. The above points are answered in the following manner;
Point No.1 and 2 - Negative, Point No.3 - As per final order, for the following;
REASONS
9. POINT NO.1 and 2: It is the case of prosecution that the accused abused CW-1 in filthy language and assaulted her with stone and voluntarily causing simple injuries. The criminal law was set into motion by CW-1 by lodging FIS. But she was not secured by the prosecution. The prosecution has examined ASI as PW1. During his evidence he has stated that he visited the Abhaya Hospital and recorded statement of CW.1 and registered FIR. He further deposed regarding drawing of mahazar as per Ex.P3. The further investigation is made by PW-2. In his evidence he deposed that he recorded statement of CW.1. He secured wound certificate of CW-1 marked at Ex.P4 and after completion of investigation he filed charge sheet.
10. PW.3 Medical officer in Abhaya Hospital. He deposed regarding the injury sustained by CW-1 and issuance of wound certificate as per EX.P.4.
4 CC.No.52477/2016
11. As per the case of prosecution the accused picked up quarrel with CW-1 and caused injury by assaulting with stone. He also abused her in filthy language. But she is not secured to depose regarding the alleged incident and the injuries sustained by her. It is stated that the alleged incident happened when CW-1 questioned regarding pelting of stones on her house. PW-1 during cross-examination has stated that he has conducted mahazar in his house. He further stated he has not observed whether the stones were thrown and there was any damage to the sheet. He has stated that no damage was caused to the house.
12. He has denied that the accused had filed complaint against CW-1 before registering FIR in this case. He denied that on 23-06-2014 the accused had filed complaint but they refused to register FIR and for that he approached to DCP. PW-2 has also stated that he does not remember whether the accused had already filed complaint against CW-1 and others before registering FIR in this case. He has also stated that he does not know whether the accused was approaching station to lodged FIS from 23-06-2014. He further stated that he does not know whether he approached DCP on refusal to receive complaint. The learned counsel for the accused argued that as police did not received the complaint of the accused he approached DCP and filed complaint. The copy of FIR and complaint in Cr.No.374/2014 were marked as Ex.D1 and 2 during cross-examination of PW-1. As per the contents of said 5 CC.No.52477/2016 documents the accused in this case has lodged FIS 03-07-2014 before DCP against CW-1 and others on with regard to alleged incident on 23-06-2014.
13. PW-3 has stated that the CW-1 was brought to the hospital with alleged history of his assault. He has issued wound certificate as per Ex.P4. It is mentioned in Ex.P4 that initially treatment was taken at K.R Puram Government hospital. During cross-examination he has stated that the injured has not produced the documents pertaining to treatment taken into the government hospital. The documents regarding the treatment given in Government hospital not produced. The Medical Officer who treated her in the said hospital is also not enquired and not examined. More over the injured is not secured to depose regarding the alleged incident. It is alleged that an assault was made with stone. But the same is not seized. It is stated in the Ex.P2 that no items used for the offence were available in the spot. The mahazar and eye witnesses were also not secured by the prosecution. There is corroboration in the evidence of prosecution witnesses.
14. The prosecution has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. After considering the materials on record, if two views are possible in such circumstance, the one which is favourable to the accused be considered. If any doubt arises, the benefit of the same should go to the accused. The facts and circumstances revealing from the evidence by itself are sufficient to extend benefit of doubt to the accused. By considering the facts 6 CC.No.52477/2016 and circumstances, the prosecution is not able to prove the charges leveled against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, Point No.1 and 2 are answered in the Negative.
14. POINT NO.3: For the afore said reasons, the following order is passed;
ORDER Acting u/S.248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is acquitted of the offences punishable u/S. 324, 504 of IPC.
Bail bond of accused and surety stand cancelled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, same was corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 16th day of September 2022).
(ARATI B.KAMATE) X A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED
Prosecution
PW.1 Basavaraj.Y.S
PW.2 Chandrappa Barki
PW.3 Dr.Jaganath
Exhibits Marked
7 CC.No.52477/2016
Ex.P1 FIS
Ex.P1(a)Signature of PW.1.
Ex.P2 FIR
Ex.P2(a)Signature of PW.1.
Ex.P3 Mahazar
Ex.P3(a)Signature of PW.1.
Ex.P4 Wound Certificate
Ex.P4(a)Signature of PW.2.
Ex.P4(b)Signature of PW.3.
Material Objects got marked
NIL
Defence
NIL
Exhibits Marked
Ex.D1 Xerox copy of FIR No.374/2014
Ex.D2 Complaint
Material Objects got marked
NIL
(ARATI B. KAMATE)
X ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU.