Bangalore District Court
State By K.S.Layout vs Ajay on 4 October, 2021
IN THE COURT OF THE 30TH ADDL.CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 4th day of October, 2021
:Present: Sri. I.P.Naik, B.A.L., LL.B.,
30th ACMM, Bengaluru
Judgment U/s.355 of Cr.P.C.
C.C.No. 22601/2018
Date of Offence 13.05.2017
Complainant State by K.S.Layout, Police Station
V/s.
Accused 1. Ajay,
S/o.Venkataramanamurthy,
Aged about 20 years,
R/at.No.7, 2nd Cross,
Manjunatha Layout,
Kanakanagara,
Bengaluru City.
Karnataka-560 078.
2. Madhu,
R/at.2nd Cross,
K.S.Layout,
Bengaluru City.
Offences U/s.504, 323, 324, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC
Plea Recorded on:13.03.2020 and accused
persons Pleaded not guilty.
313 Statement recorded on: On 01.10.2021
Final Oder Accused No.1 & 2 are Acquitted
Date of Order 04-10-2021
*****
2 C.C.No.22601/2018
JUDGMENT
The PSI of K.S.Layout, Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused persons for the offences punishable U/s.504, 323, 324, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
It is alleged that, on 13.05.2017, CW1 along with his friends was playing cricket in front of his house situated at K.S.Layout, within the territorial limits of K.S.Layout, Police Station, at that time, accused persons came there and picked up quarrel, abused CW1 in filthy language, in furtherance of your common intention, assaulted CW1 with hands assaulted CW1 with cricket bat and threatened the CW2 with dire consequences if he played cricket with their area children in near future. Hence, accused No.1 & 2 are charge sheeted.
3. In this regard, CW1 lodged the complaint before the CW7, PSI Prema Kumari. Based on the said compliant, CW7 registered the case in Cr.No.217/2017 against accused persons. On 14.05.2017 CW7 rushed to the spot and conducted the spot mahazar in the presence of witnesses as shown by the complainant. At the time of drawing mahazar IO seized cricket wicket 3 C.C.No.22601/2018 reported to this court, under P.F.No.218/2017. On 28.06.2017, CW7 recorded the statement of witnesses CW3 and CW4 and on 21.08.2017. IO has interrogated the CW2 and recorded their statement. On 13.06.2017 IO collected the wound certificate from medical expert. On 14.05.2017 accused arrested interrogated and enlarged on bail. After completing other formalities, IO filed charge sheet against accused persons for the aforesaid alleged offences.
4. Based on the charge sheet other documents this court has taken cognizance and issued process against accused No.1 & 2. Accused appeared through their respective counsel and enlarged on regular bail. Charge framed and readover to the accused, accused have pleaded not guilty claims to be tried. Hence, case is posted for evidence.
5. In order to prove the guilt of the accused persons, prosecution has examined 5 witnesses as PW1 to PW5 and got marked 4 documents as Ex.P.1 to P.4. After closure of the prosecution evidence, statement of the accused U/s.313 of Cr.P.C. is recorded. Accused put forth incriminating evidence against them as adduced by the prosecution and not chosen to lead evidence.
No documents are produced on their behalf. 4 C.C.No.22601/2018
6. Heard both the side and perused the material evidence on record.
7. The following points would arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on 13.05.2017, CW1 along with his friends was playing cricket in front of his house situated at K.S.Layout, within the territorial limits of K.S.Layout, Police Station, at that time, accused persons came there and picked up quarrel, abused CW1 in filthy language, so as to cause breach of public peace and insult him and thereby committed offence punishable Sec.504 r/.w 34 of IPC., within my cognizance.?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the above said date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, accused assaulted CW1 with hands and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 323 r/w. 34 of IPC., within my cognizance.?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the above said date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, accused persons assaulted CW1 with cricket bat and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 324 r/w. 34 of IPC?5 C.C.No.22601/2018
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the above said date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, threatened the CW2 with dire consequences if he played cricket with their area children in near future and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 504 r/w. 34 of IPC?
5. What Order?
8. My findings on the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.2 : IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.3 : IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.4: IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.5 : As per final order
...........................for the following.., REASONS
9. Point No.1 to 4 : These 4 alleged offences are occurred in single incident in order to avoid repetition of the facts and reasons these 4points are taken together for common discussion.
10. According to prosecution case, PW3 is eye witnesses he has not supported the prosecution case. He has totally turned hostile to prosecution 6 C.C.No.22601/2018 case. Though the learned Sr.APP has cross-examined him. But nothing is brought from the mouth of PW1 in respect of allegations made against accused No.1 & 2.
11. PW4 & PW5 are witnesses to the SO Mahazar and seizure of M.O-1 Cricket wicket. Both these witnesses deposed that, police have conducted the spot mahazar inresepct of the quarrel. In the cross-examination these two witnesses stated that they are not aware about about the contents of Ex.P.3 maahzar. They have put their signature on the request of the Investigation officer.
12. PW2 is the important witnesses. In this case, he is eye witnesses injured witnesses, the alleged incident. He has deposed that, 3 years back, about about 7.30pm he was playing cricket with children at Kanakanagar. At that time, one person assaulted on his left ear with cricket wicket. For thie reason he is unable to hear. He has identified the M.O-1. But he categorically stated that, accused are not aware to him. The learned Sr. APP has cross- examined these witnesses by treating hostile witnesses. But he categorically denied the recitals of Ex.P.1 complaint, Ex.P.3 mahazar. Further, the learned Sr.APP stated that, accused have assaulted on him. These suggestions is also categorically denied by thePW1.
7 C.C.No.22601/2018
13. In the course of cross-examination, PW2 stated that, he was not aware about the age and identity of the persons who assaulted him.
14. PW1 Investigation Officer deposed about the registration of the case, forwarding of FIR, drawing of mahazar and seizure of M.O-1 recording of statement of witnesses and collection of Wound Certificate. In the course of cross-examination, the learned counsel for the accused denied the investigation conducted by the PW1.
15. By considering the entire fact on record, PW4 and PW5 have stated about drawing of mahazar. An ocular evidence of PW4 and PW5 is corroborated to evidence of PW1, Investigation Officer. PW2 has identified the M.O-1. But he categorically stated that, accused have not assaulted on him. Some other persons have assaulted him. This is the important crucial fact in this case. This take total diversion regarding the allegations made against the accused regarding assault on PW2. When PW2 himself deposed against the recitals of the Ex.P.1, it creates serious doubt in the prosecution case. Whether accused No.1 & 2 have assaulted on PW2 with M.O-1. PW1 and PW2 stated regarding abuse and life threat. By considering all these aspects, I am of the opinion that, prosecution has utterly failed to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, Point No.1 to 4 is answered in the Negative.
8 C.C.No.22601/2018
16. Point No.5: In view of the Negative findings on the above point No.1 to 4, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER The Powers confirmed upon me U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused No.1 & 2 are Acquitted of the alleged offences punishable U/s. 504, 323, 324, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC.
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, hence, granting of compensation of U/s.357 of Cr.P.C. is declined.
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, hence, granting of compensation of U/s.357 of Cr.P.C. is declined.
M.O being worthless, ordered to be destroyed after appeal period. (Dictated to the Stenographer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 4th day of October, 2021).
(I.P Naik.) 30 A.C.M.M., B'lore.
th ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
PW.1 : Smt. Prema Kumari
PW.2 : Sugandha Raj
PW.3 : Darshan
PW.4 : Akshay
PW.5 : Gangadharaiah.S
9 C.C.No.22601/2018
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex.P.1 : Complaint Ex.P.2 : FIR Ex.P.3 : Mahazar Ex.P.4 : Statement of witnesses
3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE NIL
4. LIST OF THE METERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION NIL (I.P.Naik) 30th Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
10 C.C.No.22601/2018Judgment pronounced in Open Court vide separate:-
ORDER The Powers confirmed upon me U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused No.1 & 2 are Acquitted of the alleged offences punishable U/s. 504, 323, 324, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC.
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, hence, granting of compensation of U/s.357 of Cr.P.C. is declined.
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, hence, granting of compensation of U/s.357 of Cr.P.C. is declined.
M.O being worthless, ordered to be destroyed after appeal period.
(I.P.Naik) 30 Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
th 11 C.C.No.22601/2018