Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

State By Yelahanka P.S vs Is Acquitted on 16 May, 2020

      IN THE COURT OF THE XXX ADDL. C.M.M.,
                  BENGALURU.

         Dated this the 16th Day of May, 2020

         Present: Sri.I.P.Naik, B.A.LL.B. (SPL)
                  XXX ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU.

                    C.C. NO.30490/2018

      JUDGMENT U/S 355 OF THE Cr.P.C. 1973.

1. C.C.No.                    30490/2018
2. The date of commission     05/04/2018
   of the offence
3. Name of the complainant    State by Yelahanka P.S.

4. Name of the accused        Nataraju s/o Narasimhappa,
                              aged     26    years,   r/at
                              Bettahalasuru,     Bangalore
                              North Taluk, Bangalore.

5. The offence complained of U/s. 11, 12, 14, 32, 38(A),
   or proved                 43(A) of K.E.Act.

6. Plea of the accused and    Pleaded not guilty
   his/her examination
7. Final Order                Acting U/sec.248(1) Cr.P.C.
                              accused is acquitted

8. Date of such order         16-05-2020
   For the following:-
                                2                    C.C.No.30490/2018




                          JUDGMENT

The Excise Inspector of Yelahanka has filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence u/s 32 of Karnataka Excise Act.

2. On 05-04-2018 at about 8.00 a.m., CW4 Excise Inspector Siddalinga Swamy was received credible information and he summoned CW1 and 2 intimated to them regarding the credible information. Therefore, he conducted raid at Preeti Cotton Shop, Vidyanagara Circle. At the time of alleged raid the accused transporting tetra packets in one plastic bag on his bike. On inspection CW4 found that the accused transported 48 tetra packets containing 90 ml Haywards Panch whisky. In the course of alleged raid accused failed to produce license. Accordingly, he seized and return back to the copies and registered case against the accused persons. The accused is produced before the court along with FIR.

3 C.C.No.30490/2018

3. After that CW4 received chemical report extract from RTO office. After completing other formalities CW10 filed charge sheet against the accused persons.

4. In the course of investigation accused released on bail, by considering the charge sheet and other documents this court taken cognizance and registered case against the accused persons. In response of summons accused appeared. A copy of the charge sheet and other documents supplied to him, charge read over and explained to him. Accused pleaded not guilty claims to be tried.

5. In order to prove the guilt of the accused persons the prosecution examined 4 witnesses and 10 documents got marked. The statement of accused recorded u/s 313 of CrPC, accused denied incriminating evidence against the accused but he has not chosen to lead evidence.

6. Heard.

7. The points that arise for consideration are: 4 C.C.No.30490/2018

1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offence punishable u/s 32 of Karnataka Excise Act?
2. What order?

By considering the oral and documentary evidence hearing both the parties my answer is as under:

Point No.1: In the Negative Point No.2: As per final order for the following REASONS

8. Point No.1: PW1 Ravikumar not supported the prosecution case. The learned Sr.APP cross examine by him by considering hostile witness but nothing has been brought out from the mouth of this witness. According to oral evidence of PW2 he has submitted charge sheet against the accused persons.

9. The PW3 is the Excise Guard, PW4 is the main and important witness who is Team leader of alleged raid, both are categorically deposed that on 05-04-2018 they have 5 C.C.No.30490/2018 stopped the motor cycle belonging to accused at Vidyanagara Circle and inspected. At the time they found that MO1 tetra packets on motor cycle.

10. In the course of cross examination PW3 and 4 categorically admitted that the accused is working at Lakshmi Wine Store. This fact is categorically denied by PW4 in his cross examination. But considering the entire facts of the case, MO1 is seized from KSBCL and the accused is competent person for transporting said liquors from KSBCL to owner's liquor shop. Under these circumstances, mere recovery itself is not an offence the Excise Officials themselves unequivocally admitted that the accused is transporting the liquors to his owners shop who is holder of license issued in favour of Devaraje Gowda who is the owner of the Lakshmi Wines Shop. Under these circumstances it clearly shows that the prosecution utterly failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, I answer point No.1 in the Negative.

6 C.C.No.30490/2018

11. Point No.2: For going through the reasons, I proceed to pass the following ORDER Powers conferred upon me u/s 248 (1) of Cr.P.C., the accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/sec. 32 of Excise Act.

Bail bonds of accused and his surety bonds are stands cancelled, sureties withdrawn.

MO1 return to the Excise Department for final disposal of after appeal period.

(Dictated partly to the stenographer verified and corrected by me, then the judgment pronounced by me in the open court, on this 16th day of May, 2020.) (I.P.NAIK) XXX Addl. CMM, Bangalore.

ANNEXURE

1. Witnesses examined for the prosecution :

P.W.1      :   Ravikumar
P.W.2      :   Sumalatha C.
P.W.3      :   N.Thippeswamy
P.W.4      :   Siddalinga Swamy
                                7                  C.C.No.30490/2018




2. Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:

Ex.P.1      :   Mahazar
Ex.P.1(a)   :   Signature of P.W.1
Ex.P1(b)    :   Signature of PW3
Ex.P1(c)    :   Signature of witness
Ex.P2       :   Notice
Ex.P2(a)    :   Signature of PW4
Ex.P3       :   Samuchita Aadhara
Ex.P3(a)    :   Signature of witness
Ex.P4       :   List of properties
Ex.P4(a)    :   Signature of witness
Ex.P5       :   Seal format
Ex.P5(a)    :   Signature of witness
Ex.P6       :   FIR
Ex.P6(a)    :   Signature of witness
Ex.P7       :   Requisition
Ex.P7(a)    :   Signature of witness
Ex.P8       :   Report
Ex.P9       :   B-Extract
Ex.P9(a)    :   Signature of witness
Ex.10       :   B Extract

3. Witnesses examined for the defence:

NIL

4. Documents marked on behalf of the defence:

NIL

5. Materail Object:

MO1 : Tetra Packets XXX Addl. CMM, Bangalore.
8 C.C.No.30490/2018
Judgment pronounced in the open court (vide separate order) ORDER Powers conferred upon me u/s 248 (1) of Cr.P.C., the accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/sec. 32 of Excise Act.
Bail bonds of accused and his surety bonds are stands cancelled, sureties withdrawn.
MO1 return to the Excise Department for final disposal of after appeal period.
XXX Addl. CMM, Bangalore.