Bangalore District Court
State By vs Sampangiramaiah S/O Late on 4 January, 2022
CC.No.58131/2018
IN THE COURT OF THE X ADDL.C.M.M.
MAYO HALL UNIT, AT BENGALURU
Dated: This the 4th day of January 2022
PRESENT: Smt.ARATI B.KAMATE
B.A., LL.B.,
X Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bengaluru City.
C.C.No.58131/2018
Complainant - State by, Police Sub Inspector
J.B Nagara Police Station
/vs/
Accused 1.Sampangiramaiah S/o Late
Muninaduvaiah
2.K.Veena alias Yashaswini
D/o.M.Sampangiramaiah
3.Smt.K.S.Umadevi alias Rani
W/o.Muniraju
4.K.S.Girish Kumar alias Babu
S/o.M.Sampangiramaiah.
All R/at No.223, Manjunath Nilaya,
Hanumappa Road, N.T.Sandra,
Bengaluru
JUDGMENT
1. The PSI of J.B Nagara police station has filed this charge sheet against the accused persons for the offences punishable u/S. 341, 323, 354, 504, 506 R/w 34 of IPC.
2. It is alleged by the prosecution that on 21/4/2017 at about 5.45 PM when CW1 had been to Manipal hospital to see her mother-in-law, at that time CC.No.58131/2018 accused No.2 to 4 restrained CW-1 and prevented her from proceeding further and on the same day at 7 pm when CW1 to 3 came to house of accused bearing No. 223, Manjunath Nilaya, Hanumappa road, New Tippasandra to ask regarding the same, accused persons restrained CW-1 to 3 and prevented them from proceeding further. At 5.45 pm in Manipal hospital, A2 to 4 assaulted CW.1 by hands voluntarily causing hurt and on the same day at 7 pm when CW1 to 3 came to house of accused to ask regarding the same, accused persons assaulted CW1 to 3 by hands voluntarily causing hurt. At 7 pm when CW1 had come to house of accused, accused persons abused CW1 to 3 in filthy language and torn the chudidar of CW-1 and 2 with an intention to outrage their modesty and gave life threat to CW-1 to 3. Hence, it is alleged that accused have committed the alleged offences.
3. On the basis of the FIS lodged by the informant, case was registered against the accused in J.B Nagar P.S., Cr.No.141/2017 and FIR was submitted to the court. On completion of investigation chargesheet 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 their counsel and they are on bail. Copies of chargesheet were furnished to accused u/S.207 of Cr.P.C. After CC.No.58131/2018 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 Pws.1 to 3 and got marked 4 documents as Exs.P1 to P4. As there was no incriminating evidence against the accused, statement of accused u/S.313 of Cr.P.C. was dispensed with.
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 21/4/2017 at about 5.45 PM when CW1 had been to Manipal hospital to see her mother-in-law, at that time in furtherance of common intention 2 to 4 restrained CW-1 and prevented her from proceeding further and on the same day at 7 pm when CW1 to 3 came to house of accused bearing No. 223, Manjunath Nilaya, Hanumappa road, New Tippasandra to ask regarding the same, accused persons in furtherance of common intention restrained CW-1 to 3 and prevented them from proceeding further. And thereby the accused have committed an offence punishable under Section. 341 R/w 34 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on the same date, time and place, at 5.45 pm in Manipal hospital, in furtherance of common intention A2 to 4 assaulted CW.1 by hands voluntarily causing hurt and on the same day at 7 pm when CW1 to 3 came to house of accused to ask regarding the same, accused persons in furtherance of common intention assaulted CW1 to 3 by hands voluntarily causing hurt. And thereby the accused have committed an offence punishable under Section. 323 R/w 34 of IPC?
CC.No.58131/2018
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on the same date, time and place, at 7 pm when CW1 to 3 had come to house of accused, in furtherance of common intention accused persons abused CW-1 to 3 in filthy language. And thereby the accused have committed an offence punishable under Section. 504 R/w 34 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on the same date, time and place, in furtherance of common intention accused torn the chudidar of CW-1 and 2 with an intention to outrage their modesty. And thereby the accused have committed an offence punishable under Section. 354 R/w 34 of IPC?
5. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on the same date, time and place, in furtherance of common intention accused gave life threat to CW-1 to 3. And thereby the accused have committed an offence punishable under Section. 506 R/w 34 of IPC?
6. What order?
8. The above points are answered in the following manner;
Point No.1 to 5 - Negative,
Point No.6 - As per final order,
for the following;
REASONS
9. POINT NO.1 to 5: It is the case of prosecution that the accused
persons restrained CW-1 to 3 and prevented them from proceeding further. Accused persons assaulted CW1 to 3 by hands voluntarily causing hurt. Accused persons abused CW1 to 3 in filthy language and torn the chudidar of CW-1 and 2 with an intention to outrage their modesty and gave life threat to CW-1 to 3. The CC.No.58131/2018 prosecution in support of its case has examined the informant as PW.1. During her evidence she has not stated anything against the accused. She has stated that the accused have not restrained her and not assaulted her by hands. They have not abused her in filthy language and not given life threat. They did not try to outrage modesty of herself and CW-2. She has sustained injury while working and taken treatment for the same. She showed ignorance about Ex.P1 and 2. She was turned hostile by the prosecution.
10. PW-2 and 3 in their evidence stated that the accused have not restrained them and not assaulted them by hands. They have not abused them in filthy language and not given life threat. They did not try to outrage modesty of CW-1 and 2. They were turned hostile by the prosecution. Inspite of cross examination by the learned Sr. APP nothing was elicited from their mouth in support of prosecution case. They further stated that they have compromised the matter with the accused person. Even though PW.1 to 3 have stated that they have compromised the matter with the accused, that itself is not a criteria to hold that accused persons have committed the alleged offences. The prosecution has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. By considering the facts and circumstances, the prosecution is not able to prove the charges leveled against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, Points No.1 to 5 are answered in the Negative.
CC.No.58131/2018
10. POINT NO.6: For the afore said reasons, the following order is passed;
ORDER Acting Sec..248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 to 4 are acquitted of the offences punishable u/S. 341, 323, 504, 354, 506 R/w 34 of IPC.
Bail bonds of accused persons stand cancelled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, same was corrected by me on computer and then pronounced in open court on this the 4th day of January 2022).
(ARATI B.KAMATE) X A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED
Prosecution Defence
PW.1 Prabhavathi Nil
PW.2 Naveena
PW.3 Mamatha
Exhibits Marked
Ex.P1 FIS
Ex.P1(a)Signature of PW.1.
Ex.P2 Mahazar.
Ex.P2(a)Signature of PW.1.
Ex.P3 Statement of PW.2.
Ex.P4 Statement of PW.3.
Material Objects got marked
-Nil-
(ARATI B.KAMATE)
CC.No.58131/2018
X A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.