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

The State By S.G. Palya P.S vs No.1 And 2 Due To Previous Enmity on 27 April, 2023

KABC030086602019                         Presented on : 04-02-2019

                                         Registered on : 04-02-2019

                                         Decided on    : 27-04-2023

                                         Duration      : 4 years, 2 months, 23 days


      IN THE COURT OF THE VI ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
                MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY

PRESENT                             : RAGHAVENDRA VAIJANATH
                                                          B.A., LL.B., (NEW)
                                         VI A.C.M.M., BENGALURU CITY

DATED                               : 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023


             JUDGMENT UNDER SECTION 355 OF CR.P.C.

01. The serial number of the case    :      C.C. No.3040/2019

02. The date of the commission of    :      19.02.2018
    the offence

03. The name of the complainant      :      The State     by    S.G.   Palya    P.S.,
                                            Bengaluru.

04. The name of the accused         01. SEENA @ SRINIVAS S/O RAJU,
    person, and his parentage and       Aged 24 Years, R/o No.25 J Cross,
    residence                           A.C,      New     Gurappanapalya,
                                        Bengaluru.

                                    02. NAVEEN @ NAVIN KUMAR S/O
                                        ANNAYYAPPA, Aged 25 Years, R/o
                                        No.267, 4th Cross, 2nd Main,
                                        Balajinagar, Bengaluru City.
 Judgment                               2                     C.C. No. 3040/2019


05. The offence complained of or           :   U/s. 324, 504 R/w Sec.34 of IPC.
    proved

06. The plea of the accused                :   Accused No.1 & 2 pleaded not guilty.

07. The final order                        :   Accused No.1& 2 are acquitted.


08. The date of such order                 :   27.04.2023


      BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION

              The accused     No.1 & 2 herein have faced the trial for the
        offences punishable under Sections 324, 504 R/w Sec.34 of Indian
        Penal Code, 1860 upon the police report filed by the Police Sub-
        Inspector, S. G. Palya Police Station, Bengaluru.



02.           The background facts giving rise to the prosecution are as

        under:-

              On 19.02.2018 at about 05.00 P.M. at 6th Cross, Balaji Nagar
        Bengaluru, when C.W.1 and C.W.2 were on their foot then the
        accused no.1 and 2 due to previous enmity, abused by holding long
        and billhook in their hands and picked up quarrel with them and of
        whom accused no.1 with a long assaulted C.W.1 on his head and
        accused no.2 assaulted C.W.2 on his right eye.            Under these
        circumstances first information statement was lodged and a case was
        registered by the S. G. Palya P. S., Bengaluru in Crime No.51/2018.
        On completion of the investigation, charge sheet was laid against the
 Judgment                             3                     C.C. No. 3040/2019


      accused no.1 and 2 for the charge punishable under Sections stated
      supra to stand trial.



03.          On receipt of the charge sheet, Court took the cognizance of the
      said offences and issued summons requiring the appearance of
      accused no.1 and 2 and accordingly the accused no.1 and 2 have
      appeared through their counsel in pursuance of the summons and got
      enlarged themselves on bail and prosecution papers were furnished to
      the accused no.1 and 2 in compliance of Section 207 of Criminal
      Procedure Code, 1973, and this Court framed charge against the
      accused no.1 and 2 and charge under Section 324, 504 R/w Sec.34 of
      Indian Penal Code, 1860 is stated, read over and explained to the
      accused no.1 and 2 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be
      tried. Hence, the case was posted for trial.

04.          During the trial, in order to prove the guilt of the accused, the
             prosecution has examined P.W.1 (i.e., C.W.3), P.W.2 (i.e.,
      C.W.6) and got marked documents at Ex. P-1 & Ex. P-2.

05.          At the conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the accused no.1
      and 2 were not examined Under Section 313(1)(b) of Criminal
      Procedure Code as no incriminating materials appeared in the
      prosecution evidence and no evidence let in for the defence.

06.          I have heard learned Sr. A.P.P. appearing for the State and Smt.
      N. Yashaswini Advocate, the learned counsel appearing for the
      accused no.1 and 2.
 Judgment                              4                      C.C. No. 3040/2019



07.         Upon hearing arguments and on perusal of material placed on
      records, the following points arise for determination in the case:

      (1)          Whether     the   prosecution    proves     beyond      all
            reasonable doubt that the accused          No.1 & 2          have
            committed the offences punishable under sections 324, 504
            R/w Sec.34 of IPC ?

      (2)          What order?


08.   My findings on the above points are as under:


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

                               REAS O NS

09.   POINT NO. 1 :      The spot mahazar witness, P.W.1 and seizure
      mahazar witness - P.W.2 did not support the prosecution and had not
      made any statement in their examination-in-chief and cross-
      examination which could be favourably used by the prosecution.


10.         In spite of taking coercive steps against the prosecution
      witnesses, on every occasion the same were received back
      unexecuted. C.W.1, 2, 4 and 5 who are the informant, eye witness,
      mahazar witnesses are not available for the purpose of evaluation of
      their evidence. Under such circumstances, having opined that, no
 Judgment                             5                    C.C. No. 3040/2019


      fruitful purpose will be served by issuing process to the rest of the
      prosecution witnesses i.e., doctor and police witness as the ultimate
      consequence of the case will not change therefore by rejecting the
      prayer of Ld. Sr. APP further evidence on behalf of prosecution was
      closed.   From the absence of the informant the only legitimate
      inference that would arise is that he is no longer interested in
      prosecuting the matter. Under such circumstances the prosecution
      cannot be allowed to keep the case pending for an indefinite period,
      more so having due regard to the right of the accused persons to have
      the   case   against   them    enquired    into   or   tried   without
      undue/unreasonable delay. Absolutely there is no material on record
      to establish the charges. Therefore, I do hold that the prosecution has
      failed to prove the case under Section 324, 504 R/w Sec.34 of Indian
      Penal Code, 1860 against the accused no.1 and 2. Accordingly, I
      answer point No. 1 in the negative.

11.   POINT No. 2:       In view of my answer to point No.1, I proceed to
      pass following:
                                ORDER

In exercise of the power conferred upon me under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused no.1 - Seena @ Srinivas S/o Raju and accused no.2 - Naveen @ Navin Kumar S/O Annayyappa are acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 324, 504 R/w Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Judgment 6 C.C. No. 3040/2019 The accused no.1 and 2 are on bail. Their bail bond stands cancelled and surety is discharged.

The property seized under P.F. No.20/2018 dated 20.02.2018 at Sl. No.1 and 2 being worthless are ordered to be destroyed after the appeal period is over.

The property seized under P.F. No.22/2018 dated 20.02.2018 at Sl. No.1 and 2 being worthless are ordered to be destroyed after the appeal period is over.

The accused no.1 and 2 shall execute bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/- each with a like sum surety to the satisfaction of this Court, undertaking to appear before the Hon'ble higher Court as and when such Court issues notice in respect of any appeal or petition filed against this judgment and such bail bonds shall be in force for six months as mandated under Section 437A of Cr.P.C.

(Typed directly on computer by me, after corrections pronounced by me in Open Court on this the 27th day of April, 2023).





                                          (RAGHAVENDRA VAIJANATH)
                                             VI ACMM., Bengaluru City
 Judgment                            7                   C.C. No. 3040/2019




                             ANNEXURE

[I]    LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PROSECUTION:
       (1)   P.W.1       :    Ravi S/o Narayana Reddy
       (2)   P.W.2       :    Rajashekhar S/o Raju


[II] LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION:

       (1)   Ex.P-1      :    Mahazar
       (2)   Ex.P-1(a)   :    Signature of P.W.1
       (3)   Ex.P-2      :    Mahazar
       (4)   Ex.P-2(a)   :    Signature of P.W.2


[III] LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION:

: NIL [IV] LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR DEFENCE:

                         :    NIL
[V]    LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR DEFENCE:
       01.   M. O. 1     :    NIL




                                        (RAGHAVENDRA VAIJANATH)
                                           VI ACMM., Bengaluru City