Bangalore District Court
The State Represented By vs A2: Sri.Venkatesh @ Divakar on 3 August, 2016
1 C.C.No.9547/2013
IN THE COURT OF III ADDL., CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE
BENGALURU CITY
Dated this 3rd August 2016
Present: Sri.S.T.Devaraja, B.Sc.,LL.B.,
III Addl., Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru.
C.C.No:9547/2013
Complainant : The State represented by
Sub-Inspector of Police,
Madivala Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(By Sr.APP, Bengaluru)
V/s
Accused: A2: Sri.Venkatesh @ Divakar,
S/o Sri.Babu,
Aged about 29 yrs,
R/at: near Bommanahalli
Government School,
2 C.C.No.9547/2013
6th Cross, Bommanahalli,
Bengaluru.
(By Sri. KVS Adv., Bengaluru)
---
JUDGEMENT U/Sec.355 of Cr.P.C.
Case No. : C.C.No.9547/2013
Date of offence : 28/10/2009
Complainant : Sri.Srinivasan
Accused : As detailed above
Offence : U/Secs.457 and 380
R/w Sec.511 of IPC.
Charge : Accused claimed to be tried
Final order : Acquitted
Date of order : 3/8/2016
The brief statement
and the Reasons for the
decision : As follows
---
3 C.C.No.9547/2013
JUDGEMENT
The Police Inspector of Madivala Police have filed the chargesheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/Secs.457 and 380 R/w Sec.511 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution is as follows:
It is the case of the prosecution that on 28/10/2009 during night hours the accused persons illegally trespassed the BSNL Exchange Office by break opening the lock and also made an attempt to break open the locker. It is the case of the prosecution that on 8/1/2009 and 18/1/2009 the accused persons arrested and on their information seized the iron rod and subjected at PF.No.8/2010 and the CW1 has identified the accused persons. On the complainant of CW.1 by name Sri.Srinivasan the Madivala Police have 4 C.C.No.9547/2013 registered a case in Crime No.1106/2009 and after completion of investigation filed the chargesheet.
3. The split up case is registered against this accused No.2. The accused No.2 appeared before the Court and engaged the services of a counsel. The charges framed by the learned Predecessor and the accused No.2 claimed to be tried.
4. Heard, perused the entire case records.
5. The only point that arises for my consideration is:
1. Whether the prosecution has proved the case beyond all reasonable doubt for the offences punishable U/Secs.457 and 380 R/w Sec.511 of IPC?
2. What Order?
6. My findings on the above points are as hereunder:
Point No.1: In the Negative Point No.2: As per final order for the following:5 C.C.No.9547/2013
::REASONS::
7. Point No.1: On consideration of the materials available on record the order sheet reveals ever since from the date of framing of charges and consequent to that repeatedly summons, bailable warrant and NBW have been issued against the charge sheeted witnesses. Inspite of it the concerned investigation agency failed to secure any of the witnesses before the Court. Thereby, there is utter failure of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused No.2. Consequently, resulting in failure to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt. No evidence is available on record. Under the said circumstances, this Court has no option except to acquit the accused No.2. Hence, I answer Point No.1 in the NEGATIVE.
8. Point No.2: In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
6 C.C.No.9547/2013
::ORDER::
Acting under Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.2 is hereby ACQUITTED for the offences punishable U/Secs.457 and 380 R/w Sec.511 of IPC.
The bail bond of the accused No.2 and that of the surety stand cancelled. (Dictated to the stenographer on computer, transcribed by her, revised and corrected by me and then pronounced in the open Court on this the 3/8/2016).
(S.T.Devaraja), III Addl., Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
::ANNEXURE::
1. List of witnesses examined for the prosecution : NIL
2. Documents marked on the side of the prosecution : NIL 7 C.C.No.9547/2013
3. Material objects marked : NIL
4. Defence Evidence : NIL
---
III Addl., Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.