Bangalore District Court
Ume Rubab vs Vijaya Lakshmi on 9 January, 2026
1
C.C.No.25097/2018
KABC030678262018
Presented on : 12-09-2018
Registered on : 12-09-2018
Decided on : 09-01-2026
Duration: 7 years, 3 months, 27 days
IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU CITY
DATED THIS THE 09th DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
PRESENT.
SRI. SIDDARAMA.S. M.A, LL.M.
III ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
AT BENGALURU CITY
C.C.No.25097/2018
State by Karnataka S.J.Park Police Station, Bengaluru.
(Represented by Sr. APP)
V/s
Accused Persons 1. Smt.Vijayalakshmi
W/o Chandrashekar,
Aged about 48 years,
R/at No.864, 2nd Cross,
1st Block, 3rd Stage,
Basaveshwaranagar,
Bengaluru.
2. Smt.Kousalya
2
C.C.No.25097/2018
W/o Ravishankar,
Aged about 50 years,
R/at No.7, Chikkajala,
Bengaluru North.
(Reptd., by Sri.V.G.S., Advocate)
Name of the Smt.Ume Rubab,
Complainant : Excise Inspector,
Binnipet Zone,
Bengaluru.
Date of offence 01.07.1988 to 30.06.2017
Date of offence reported 06.07.2017
Date of Commence of 25.03.2021
Evidence
Date of Closure of 28.10.2025
Evidence
Offence Committed Under Section 408, 419, 420, 467,
468, 471, 474, 120(B) read with
section 34 of IPC.
Opinion of Judge Found not guilty.
Complainant by Learned Senior Assistant Public
Prosecutor.
Accused by By Sri.V.G.S., Advocate
(SIDDARAMA.S.)
III ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
AT BENGALURU CITY.
3
C.C.No.25097/2018
JUDGMENT
The PSI of S.J.Park Police Station submitted charge sheet against the accused persons for the offences punishable under sections 408, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120(B) read with section 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as follows:-
The case of the prosecution is that the accused No.1 and 2 were the friends. The accused No.2 is the original licensee holder of the CL-2 license of Vinayaka Wines, situated at No. 50, Padarayanapura Main Road, Cholurapalya, Vijayanagar Pipe Line, Bangalore since 1889-90. The accused No.2 violated the rules of the Excise Act appointed the accused No.1 to taking care of her business. As per the Excise Act the license of the wine shop to be renew every year. At the time renewal of CL-2 license of the Vinayaka Wines she created the fraudulent documents i.e., PAN Card No.AVDPK0669B and Ration Card No.BLW05112838 and shows the said documents are genuine documents to the department and also given her photo by telling her name Smt.K.Kousalya and fraudulently signed in the English language and renewed the CL-2 license 4 C.C.No.25097/2018 every year the accused persons have committed the criminal breach of trust and committed the above offences. After completion of the investigation the PSI of S.J.Park Police Station has filed the charge sheet against the accused persons for the offences punishable under sections 408, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120(B) read with section 34 of IPC.
3. Thereafter, the complainant has lodged the complaint in Central Police station. In turn they have registered the case under Crime No.0066/2017. Thereafter, police visited the spot, drew the mahazar, secured in the presence of the accused persons subsequently were enlarged on bail.
Thereafter, on completion of the investigation, I.O. has submitted the charge sheet against the accused persons for the above said offences. After filing the charge sheet, Court has taken cognizance of the offences against the accused persons and issued summons to them.
4. The accused persons have appeared before the court through their counsel. Copy of the prosecution papers were furnished under Section 207 of Code of Criminal procedure. Thereafter, heard both side, the charges framed against the 5 C.C.No.25097/2018 accused No.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under sections 408, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120(B) read with section 34 of IPC. Read over and explained to the accused No.1 and 2 were pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. To substantiate the case of the prosecution, the prosecution have examined the18 witnesses as PW-1 to PW-18 and got marked 23 documents as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-23. The accused persons did not choose to lead defense evidence. The statement of the accused No.1 and 2 under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., is recorded.
6. Heard the arguments from both side and perused the deposition and documents.
7. After hearing the parties and on perusal of records, the following points arose for my consideration.
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused No.1 and 2 were the friends. The accused No.2 is the original licensee holder of the CL-2 license 6 C.C.No.25097/2018 of Vinayaka Wines, situated at No. 50, Padarayanapura Main Road, Cholurapalya, Vijayanagar Pipe Line, Bangalore since 1889-90. The accused No.2 violated the rules of the Excise Act appointed the accused No.1 to taking care of her business and entrusted in such capacity with property, or with any dominion over property. As per the Excise Act the license of the wine shop to be renew every year. At the time renewal of CL-2 license of the Vinayaka Wines she created the fraudulent documents i.e., PAN Card No.AVDPK0669B and Ration Card No.BLW05112838 and shows the said documents are genuine documents to the department and also given her photo by telling her name Smt.K.Kousalya and 7 C.C.No.25097/2018 fraudulently signed in the English language and renewed the CL-2 license every year and thereby the accused persons have committed the criminal breach of trust for the offence punishable under section 408 read with section 34 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above said date, place and time that the accused persons at the time of renewal of CL-2 license of the Vinayaka Wines created the fraudulent documents i.e., PAN Card No.AVDPK0669B and Ration Card No.BLW05112838 and shows the said documents are genuine documents to the department and also given her photo by telling her name Smt.K.Kousalya and 8 C.C.No.25097/2018 fraudulently signed in the English language and renewed the CL-2 license every year and thereby the accused persons have cheated by personation to the Excise Department and committed the offence punishable under section 419 read with section 34 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above said date, place and time that the accused No.1 and 2 were the friends. The accused No.2 is the original licensee holder of the CL-2 license of Vinayaka Wines, situated at No. 50, Padarayanapura Main Road, Cholurapalya, Vijayanagar Pipe Line, Bangalore since 1889-90. The accused No.2 for the purpose of cheating violated the rules of the 9 C.C.No.25097/2018 Excise Act appointed the accused No.1 to taking care of her business and entrusted in such capacity with property, or with any dominion over property. As per the Excise Act the license of the wine shop to be renew every year. At the time renewal of CL-2 license of the Vinayaka Wines she created the fraudulent documents i.e., PAN Card No.AVDPK0669B and Ration Card No.BLW05112838 and shows the said documents are genuine documents to the department and also given her photo by telling her name Smt.K.Kousalya and fraudulently signed in the English language and renewed the CL-2 license every year and thereby the accused persons have cheated the Excise Department and committed 10 C.C.No.25097/2018 the offence punishable under section 420 read with section 34 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above said date, place and time that the accused persons at the time renewal of CL-2 license of the Vinayaka Wines created the fraudulent documents i.e., PAN Card No.AVDPK0669B and Ration Card No.BLW05112838 and shows the said documents are genuine documents to the department and also given her photo by telling her name Smt.K.Kousalya and fraudulently signed in the English language and thereby the accused persons have forged the documents and committed the the offence 11 C.C.No.25097/2018 under section 467 read with section 34 of IPC?
5. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above said date, place and time that the accused persons at the time renewal of CL-2 license of the Vinayaka Wines created the fraudulent documents i.e., PAN Card No.AVDPK0669B and Ration Card No.BLW05112838 and shows the said documents are genuine documents to the department and also given her photo by telling her name Smt.K.Kousalya and fraudulently signed in the English language and thereby the accused persons for the purpose of cheating forged the documents and committed the the offence under 12 C.C.No.25097/2018 section 468 read with section 34 of IPC?
6. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above said date, place and time that the accused persons at the time renewal of CL-2 license of the Vinayaka Wines created the fraudulent documents i.e., PAN Card No.AVDPK0669B and Ration Card No.BLW05112838 and shows the said fraudulents documents are the genuine documents to the department and also given her photo by telling her name Smt.K.Kousalya and for the purpose of cheating fraudulently signed in the English language and thereby the accused persons have committed the the 13 C.C.No.25097/2018 offence under section 471 read with section 34 of IPC?
7. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above said date, place and time that the accused persons at the time renewal of CL-2 license of the Vinayaka Wines created the fraudulent documents i.e., PAN Card No.AVDPK0669B and Ration Card No.BLW05112838 and shows the said fraudulent documents knowing it to be forged documents shows the said documents are the genuine documents to the department and also knowing to be she is not a original owner given her photo by telling her name Smt.K.Kousalya and also fraudulently signed in the English language and thereby the 14 C.C.No.25097/2018 accused persons have committed the the offence under section 474 read with section 34 of IPC?
8. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the above said date, place and time that the accused No.1 and 2 were the friends. The accused No.2 is the original licensee holder of the CL-2 license of Vinayaka Wines, situated at No. 50, Padarayanapura Main Road, Cholurapalya, Vijayanagar Pipe Line, Bangalore since 1889-90 and they were joined together made criminal conspiracy violated the rules of the Excise Act appointed the accused No.1 to taking care of her business. As per the Excise Act the license of the wine shop to be renew every year. At the time 15 C.C.No.25097/2018 renewal of CL-2 license of the Vinayaka Wines she created the fraudulent documents i.e., PAN Card No.AVDPK0669B and Ration Card No.BLW05112838 and shows the said documents are genuine documents to the department and also given her photo by telling her name Smt.K.Kousalya and fraudulently signed in the English language and renewed the CL-2 license every year and thereby the accused persons have made criminal conspiracy made wrongful gain and committed the offence punishable under section 120(B) read with section 34 of IPC?
9. What order?
8. Heard the arguments from both side and perused the materials available on records. 16
C.C.No.25097/2018
9. My findings to 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 : In the NEGATIVE.
POINT No.6 : In the NEGATIVE.
POINT No.7 : In the NEGATIVE.
POINT No.8 : In the NEGATIVE.
POINT No.9 : As per final order, for the
following:-
REASONS
10. Point No.1 to 8 :- These above points are inter- linked with each others and required similar type of appreciation of evidence, Hence, they are taken together for common discussion.
11. In support of its case, the prosecution out of the 22 witnesses in the charge sheet examined eighteen witnesses as PW-1 to PW-18. i.e., PW-1 is the complainant,PW-2 is the spot mahazar, PW-3 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF 17 C.C.No.25097/2018 No.19/2018, PW-4 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF No.19/2018, PW-5 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF No.21/2018, PW-6 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF No.23/2018, PW-7 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF No.23/2018, PW-8 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF No.24/2018, PW-9 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF No.31/2018, PW-16 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF No.31/2018, PW-11 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF No.24/2018, PW-12 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF No.30/2018, PW-13 is the seizure mahazar witness in PF No.30/2018, PW-14 is an Assistant Director Income Tax Department, PW-15 is the Excise Police Inspector, PW-16 is the Investigating Officer, PW-17 is the Excise Police Inspector, PW- 18 is the Assistant Director of FSL Department and got marked the documents as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-23 i.e., Ex.P-1 is the Complaint, Ex.P-2 is the Spot Mahazar, Ex.P-3 is the Seizure mahazar, Ex.P-4 is the Seizure mahazar, Ex.P-5 is the Account Opening Form, Ex.P-6 is the Seizure mahazar , Ex.P-7 isthe Statement of PW-6, Ex.P-8 is the Statement of PW-7, Ex.P-9 is the Seizure mahazar, Ex.P10 is the statement of PW-8, Ex.P-11 is the Seizure mahazar , Ex.P-12 is the Statement of PW-9, 18 C.C.No.25097/2018 Ex.P-13 is the Statement of PW-10, Ex.P-14 is the Memorandum letter dated 28.06.2017, Ex.P-16 is the Seizure mahazar, Ex.P-17 is the Statement of PW-12, Ex.P-18 is the statement of PW-13, Ex.P-19 is the Letter dated 24.08.2018, Ex.P-20 is the Statement of PW-15, Ex.P-21 is the FIR, Ex.P-22 is the Statement of PW-17 and Ex.P-23 is the FSL Report.
12. The case of the prosecution is that the accused No.1 and2 were the friends. The accused No.2 is the original licensee holder of the CL-2 license of Vinayaka Wines, situated atNo. 50, Padarayanapura Main Road, Cholurapalya, Vijayanagar Pipe Line, Bangalore since 1889-90. The accused No.2 violated the rules of the Excise Act appointed the accused No.1 to taking care of her business. As per the Excise Act the license of the wine shop to be renew every year. At the time renewal of CL-2 license of the Vinayaka Wines she created the fraudulent documents i.e., PAN Card No.AVDPK0669B and Ration Card No.BLW05112838 and shows the said documents are genuine documents to the department and also given her photo by telling her name Smt.K.Kousalya and fraudulently signed in the 19 C.C.No.25097/2018 English language and renewed the CL-2 license every year the accused persons have committed the criminal breach of trust and committed the above offences. After completion of the investigation the PSI of S.J.Park Police Station has filed the charge sheet against the accused persons for the offences punishable under sections 408, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120(B) read with section 34 of IPC.
13. To bring the home the guilt of accused persons the prosecution has to prove the ingredients of Under Section 408 of IPC.
Sec. 408 of I P C Reads as follows:
Section 408 : Criminal breach of trust by clerk or servant.- Whoever, being a clerk or servant or employed as a clerk or servant, and being in any manner entrusted in such capacity with property, or with any dominion over property, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may 20 C.C.No.25097/2018 extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.
Essential ingredients:- an offence under this section has following essential ingredients;
1. Accused was a clerk or servant.
2. Accused was entrusted with certain property or he had dominion over certain property which was not his own.
3. He committed criminal breach of trust for the said property.
14. To bring the home the guilt of accused persons the prosecution has to prove the ingredients of Under Section 419 of IPC.
Sec. 419 of I P C Reads as follows:
419. Punishment for cheating by personation.--
Whoever cheats by personation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. 21
C.C.No.25097/2018
15. To bring the home the guilt of accused persons the prosecution has to prove the ingredients of Under Section 420 of IPC.
Sec. 420 of I P C Reads as follows:
Section 420 : Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.- Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
1. Essential ingredients are as follows;
1. Accused cheated the complainant.
2. Accused did so dishonestly.
3. Thereby induced the complainant: 22
C.C.No.25097/2018
(i) to deliver some property to accused or to some other person.
(ii) to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of the valuable security or anything which was signed, sealed, and which was capable of being converted into valuable security.
2. One of the ingredients of cheating as defined in Section 415 of the Indian Penal Code is existence of an intention of making initial promise or existence thereof from the very beginning of formation of contract. S.V.L. Murthy v/s. State Rep. By CBI, Hyderabad, 2009 (4) Supreme 399 : 2009 (7) JT 385 : (2009) 6 SCC 77 : (2009) 2 SCC (Crl) 941 : AIR 2009 SC 2717.
3. To constitute an offence under section 420, there should not only be cheating, but as a consequence of such cheating, the accused should have dishonestly include the person deceived (I) to delivery any property to any person, or (ii) to make, alter or destroy wholly or in part a valuable security (or anything signed or sealed and which is capable of being coverted into a valuable security). Md. Ibrahim v/s. State of 23 C.C.No.25097/2018 Bihar, 2009 (6) Supreme 470 : 2009 (11) JT 533 : 2009 (4) Crimes 13 : (2009) 3 SCC (Crl) 929.
16. To bring the home the guilt of accused persons the prosecution has to prove the ingredients of Under Section 467 of IPC.
Sec. 467 of I P C Reads as follows:
467. Forgery of valuable security, will, etc.--Whoever forges a document which purports to be a valuable security or a will, or an authority to adopt a son, or which purports to give authority to any person to make or transfer any valuable security, or to receive the principal, interest or dividends thereon, or to receive or deliver any money, movable property, or valuable security, or any document purporting to be an acquittance or receipt acknowledging the payment of money, or an acquittance or receipt for the delivery of any movable property or valuable security, shall be 24 C.C.No.25097/2018 punished with [imprisonment for life], or 4 with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
17. To bring the home the guilt of accused persons the prosecution has to prove the ingredients of Under Section 468 of IPC.
Sec. 468 of I P C Reads as follows:
Forgery for purpose of cheating.- Whoever commits forgery, intending that the [document or electronic record forged] shall be used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine. Essential ingredients are as follows;
(i) Document in question is forged
(ii) Accused forged it.
(iii) In forging he intended that it shall be used for cheating.25
C.C.No.25097/2018
18. To bring the home the guilt of accused persons the prosecution has to prove the ingredients of Under Section 471 of IPC.
Sec. 471 of I P C Reads as follows:
Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any document which he knows or has reason to believe to be a forged document, shall be punished in the same manner as if he had forged such document.
19. To bring the home the guilt of accused persons the prosecution has to prove the ingredients of Under Section 474 of IPC.
Sec. 474 of I P C Reads as follows:
474. Having possession of document described in section 466 or 467, knowing it to be forged and intending to use it genuine.--5[Whoever has in his possession any document or electronic record, 26 C.C.No.25097/2018 knowing the same to be forged and intending that the same shall fraudulently or dishonestly be used as genuine, shall, if the document or electronic record is one of the description mentioned in section 466 of this Code], be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if the document is one of the description mentioned in section 467, shall be punished with 4[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description, for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine
20. To bring the home the guilt of accused persons the prosecution has to prove the ingredients of Under Section 120(B) of IPC.
Sec.120(B) of I P C Reads as follows: 27
C.C.No.25097/2018 Punishment of criminal conspiracy.-
(1) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death, [imprisonment for life] or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where no express provision is made in this Code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if he had abetted such offence.
(2) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable as aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding six months, or with fine or with both.
21. PW-1 namely Smt.Ume rubab deposed in her chief examination that in the year 2017 the complaint received in his Deputy Commissioner Office regarding the license of Vinayaka 28 C.C.No.25097/2018 Wines, Padarayanapura belongs to Smt.Kousalya it was reported that Smt.Vijayalakshmi was running this wines of in CL-2 license belongs to Smt.Kousalya. When the inquiry was conducted in in his Deputy Commissioner Office herself had given documents Kousalya given photograph and renewed the license accordingly his Deputy Commissioner said that legal action should be take against her accordingly she has filed complaint. She identified the complaint and her signature in the complaint. The complaint marked Ex.P-1 and her signature is marked as Ex.P-1(a). The said complaint given on 06.07.2017 that on 07.07.2017 the S.J. Park Police came to her office at about 10.00 am to 10.30am. They drawn the Mahazar at the time she put his signature to the Mahazar. At the time of drawing Mahazar one Excise Guard namely Jagadeesh, Excise Sub-Inspector M.Shankar were present. The said Mahzar drawn at office. The witness identified the Mahazar and her signature and the said Mahazar marked as Ex.P-2 her signature marked as Ex.P-2(a). The witness identified the order passed by the Excise Deputy Commissioner the said order marked as Ex.P-14.
29
C.C.No.25097/2018
22. PW-1 deposed in her cross examination that she was joined to the Police Inspector to the Excise Department. The allegation made against the accused persons coming under the Karnataka Excise Act. Hence she filed the complaint according to section 6 of the Karnataka Excise Act. The Police Sub- Inspector and Excise Police Inspector are the investigation officers she did not investigate this case. Likewise, license must be renewed every year, the renewal process begin upon application, the renewal application must be submitted one month before expiry of the license. The renewal period ends on 30th,june. It is correct that we begin the renewal process in the month of May every year at the time of lodged the complaint the Deputy Commissioner of Excise had the authority to renewed the license. she admitted that the District Collector had authority to renewed the license totally 35 of Sannadu were coming under our jurisdiction. she don't remember in which format they have to file the renewal application. she deposed that in this case called upon the license holder at the time of verification of the application she admitted that when she was in Zonal Officer time to time verified the application if it is found any deficiency she entered the investigation book. 30
C.C.No.25097/2018
23. PW-2 namely Sri.M.Shankar deposed in his Chief Examination that on 07.07.2017 at about 10.00 AM the PSI came to the office of the Binnipete the Excise Inspector came to the Mahazar. On the basis of the complaint given by the CW-1. In the year 1988-89 Smt.Kousalya was received the CL-2 license and running the business at Vinayaka Wines Padarayanapura she appointed one Sri.Chandrashekar to look after it, at that time Sri.Chandrashekar told his wife by name Smt.Vijayalakshmi as a Kousalya and told the Police that he had renewed the license by showing Vijayalakshmi as a Kousalya in all the documents to their Excise Department and Chandrashekar was look after the transaction as per the instructions the Mahazar was done in his office he put his signature to the Ex.P-2 marked as Ex.P-2(b).
24. PW-2 admitted in his cross examination that the Ex.P-2 Mahazar written in their office, the said Mahazar written by PSI. He did not investigate this case except put the signature to the Ex.P-2.
25. PW-5 namely Sri.Raghavendra H.N. deposed in his Chief examination that from September 2015 he has been working as a Clerk at Karnataka Bank at Hunasemaranahalli 31 C.C.No.25097/2018 that on 30.07.2018. The Police asked the Kousalya account number i.e., 3252500101450901 he gave the KYC documents to the Police at the time his Manager Tribhuvan H.C. was present. On the basis of his suggestion he gave the said documents. Witness identified the said documents marked as Ex.P-5.
26. pw5 deposed in his cross examination that he gave the said documents at Manager room in the presence of the Manager. He don't know what they did after gave the documents. He himself and one Pavan put the signature but their Manager did not put the signature.
27. PW-14 namely Smt.Bhanumathi deposed in her chief examination that she has been work at Income Tax Department from the 25 years. That on 02.07.2018 the investigation officer requested the PAN details of Sri.Krishnappa, Smt.Vijayalakshmi, Sri.Krishnaiah Kousalya, Sri.Venkataramiah and Sri.Chandrashekar he has given a report on 24.08.2018 based on the data of available in his department, as per the said report Sri.Krishnappa, Vijayalakshmi PAN number is ACUPV7093E and Sri.Krishnappa PAN number is AJGPK2120E and 32 C.C.No.25097/2018 Sri.Venkataramiah and Chandrashekar PAN number is ABHPC1839K.
28. The pw14 deposed in her cross examination that before 2004 the application for PAN Card had to be submitted in the prescribed format. After 2004 the application can be submitted on line or off line. she admitted that different people with the same name by get different PAN Cards so she has given the report that Krishnappa Kousalya PAN Card was found to be in valid. But she said that Krishnappa PAN Card was found to be invalid due to error while enter in the PAN DATA on the website.
29. PW-15 namely Sri.Lanke Hanumaiah deposed in his chief examination that he has been working as a Excise Inspector at Binnipet from 2009 to 2013. He knew the person with Blue Bag in the court her name is Kousalya. The Police did not called him to the Police station and have not shown any documents at the Police station. He has renewed the CL-2 license from 2010-11 to 2013-14 for four years.
30. During the course of Cross Examination by the Learned Sr.APP he deposed that it is not true to suggest that he knew about complaint filed against Kousalya and 33 C.C.No.25097/2018 Vijayalakshmi. He denied the suggestion that already the Police shown the documents and photos of Vijayalakshmi and Kousalya. He did not know the Police seize the documents regarding the year 2010-11. He denied the suggestion that he verified the documents from 2009 to 2013 after he renewed the license even though deposed false evidence to the help of accused persons.
31. PW-16 namely Sri.Santhosh P.G. in his Chief Examination that he worked as a PSI at S.J.Park Police Station from 2014 to 2019. The CW-1 appeared before the station at about 10.15 AM and received the typed complaint on 06.07.2017 and registered in Crime No.66/2017 and submit the report before the court. The said complaint already marked as Ex.P-1 and his signature is marked as Ex.P-1(b). The FIR marked as Ex.P-21 and his signature marked as Ex.P-21(a). On 07.07.2017 in the presence of CW-2 and CW-3 drawn the panchanama at Excise office. The Panchanama already marked As Ex.P-2 and his signature is marked as Ex.P-2(b). On the same day collected the statement from CW-2 and CW-3. On 10.07.2017 the CW-4 produced the 68 documents related to the said case and the said documents were seized in the presence 34 C.C.No.25097/2018 of CW-5 and CW-6 and his signature is marked as Ex.P-3(c) and reported the said documents under PF No.19/2017 and submitted before the court. On the same day collected the statements from CW-4 to CW-6. On 30.07.2017 seized the account opening form at Karnataka Bank, Hunasemaranahalli in the presence of CW-7 and CW-8 and reported under PF No.21/2018 and submitted before the court. The seizure panchanama is already marked as Ex.P-4 and his signature is marked as Ex.P-4(b) and collected the statement from CW7- and CW-8 and the Branch Manager of the Bank On 30.07.2017 he collected the statements from CW-7, CW-8 and CW-13. On 01.08.2018 took the one specimen signature of Vijayalakshmi in the presence of CW-9 and CW-10 and drawn the mahazar and reported the same in PF report and submitted report before the court. He identified the mahazar which is already marked as Ex.P-6 and his signature is marked as Ex.P6(c).
32. PW-18 namely Smt.Chandrika.G deposed in her chief examination that she has been working in the Forensic Science Laboratory in the various positions since 2004. On 08.08.2018, 33 sealed covers related to SJ Park Police Station 35 C.C.No.25097/2018 in case NO. 66/2017 has been received in our tapal department through Ramesh.N.R. P.C.12075. The seals on the items were in good condition and matched the sample seal. Also details such as the material list were consistent with the material condition. He opened the 33 seal cover for examination on the orders of the head of the department and the said all documents marked as per Q-1 to Q-31 and AS-1 AS-2 and SS- 7 to SS-12, SS-1 to SS-6 and AS-2, SS7 to SS12 and Q-4 to Q- 12, Q-13(a) to Q-13(c), Q-1, Q-15, Q6(a) to Q16(c), Q-17 to Q- 25, Q-26(a) to Q-26(c), Q-27 to Q-29, Q-30(a) to Q30(c), Q-31. Q-4 to Q-12. Q-13(a) to Q13(c), Q-14, Q-15, Q16(a) to Q-16(c). Q-17 to Q-25, Q-26(a) to Q-26(c), Q-27 to Q-29, Q-30(a) to Q- 30(c), Q31 and also marked the FSL report as Ex.P-23 and his signature marked as Ex.P-23(a).
33. The PW-18 deposed in her cross examination that the IO has not took the signature of the accused persons in her presence. she seen only the documents which were sent the IO before her. The formation of the signature of the persons did not change if the person aged. The IO did not send the specimen writing of the accused persons. 36
C.C.No.25097/2018
34. In the instant case out of the 22 witnesses in the charge sheet PW-3, PW-4, PW-6, PW-7, PW-8, PW-9, PW-10 to PW-13 were turned fully hostile to the case of the prosecution. PW-15 and PW-17 partly hostile to the case of the prosecution. CW-2, CW-7 were given up, cw4andcw20 dropped, During the course of cross examination of learned Sr.APP nothing has been elicited from the mouth of pw3,pw4.pw6to,pw9 and pw10topw13,pw15 and pw17.
35. it is pertinent to note that, The pw1 admitted in the cross examination that the District Collector had authority to renewed the license totally 35 of Sannadu were coming under our jurisdiction. she don't remember in which format they have to file the renewal application, Thepw2.deposed in the cross examination that he did not investigate this case except put the signature to the Ex.P-2,Thepw14 admitted in the cross examination that different people with the same name by get different PAN Cards so she has given the report. The pw18.deposed in the cross examination that the IO has not took the signature of the accused persons in her presence. The formation of the signature of the persons did not change if 37 C.C.No.25097/2018 the person aged. The IO did not send the specimen writing of the accused persons.
36. In this case, the prosecution has failed to elicit anything favorable to it to prove the allegations against the accused No.1 and 2 under section 408, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120(B) read with section 34 of IPC. When these being the facts, I am of the opinion that in total the prosecution has failed to bring home the guilt of the accused No.1 and 2 beyond all reasonable doubt. In view of the same, this court hold Point Nos.1 to 8 in the Negative.
37. Point No.9: For the reasons stated and finding given to point No.1to8 the following is made.
ORDER The accused No.1 and 2 are not found guilty for the offence punishable under section 408, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120(B) read with section 34 of IPC.
Acting under section 248(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure the accused No.1 and 2 are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under 38 C.C.No.25097/2018 section 408, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120(B) read with section 34 of IPC.
The bail bonds and surety bonds executed by them stand canceled.
(Directly dictated to the stenographer on computer, typed by him, revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 09 th day of January, 2026).
(SIDDARAMA.S.) III ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, AT BENGALURU CITY.
ANNEXURE
1. List of witnesses examined for the prosecution:
PW-1 : Smt.Umerbab W/o Sri.Syed Shabab Ali; PW-2 : Sri.M.Shankar W/o Late Muninagappa; PW-3 : Sri.A.Kumara S/o Sri.Ankappa; PW-4 : Sri.Raju.L S/o Sri.M.Lakshman; PW-5 : Sri.Raghavendra H.N. S/o Sri.Nagabhushana H.K.; PW-6 : Sri.Nagesh S/o Sri.Basavegowda; PW-7 : Sri.Vivek S/o Sri.Lakshmaiah; PW-8 : Sri.Prakash S/o Sri.Madaiah; PW-9 : Sri.Narayana S/o Sri.Sannahalappa; PW-10 : Sri.R.Nataraja S/o Sri.Ramaiah; PW-11 : Sri.Manju H.K. S/o Sri.Kengiregowda; 39
C.C.No.25097/2018 PW-12 : Sri.Nandeesh A.V S/o Sri.Vishakantegowda; PW-13 : Sri.Mohana S/o Sri.Gangegowda; PW-14 : Smt.Bhanumathi W/o Sri.Sudhakar; PW-15 : Sri.Lanke Hanumaiah S/o Sri.K.C.Anjaneya; PW-16 : Sri.Santhosh P.G. S/o Sri.K.Gundaiah; PW-17 : Sri.Krishnappa S/o Sri.Ningappa; PW-18 : Smt.Chandrika.G W/o Sri.Dr.Kiran Kumar.M.
2. List of witnesses examined for the defense:
- NIL -
3. List of documents exhibited for the prosecution:
Ex.P-1 : Complaint dated 06.07.2017; Ex.P-1(a) : Signature of PW-1;
Ex.P-1(b) : Signature of PW-16; Ex.P-2 : Spot Mahazar;
Ex.P-2(a) : Signature of PW-1;
Ex.P-2(b) : Signature of PW-2;
Ex.P-2(c) : Signature of PW-16;
Ex.P-3: SeizureMahazar;;
Ex.P-3(a) : Signature of PW-3;
Ex.P-3(b) : Signature of PW-4;
Ex.P-3(c) : Signature of PW-16; Ex.P-4 : Seizure Mahazar;;
Ex.P-4(a) : Signature of PW-5;
Ex.P-4(b) : Signature of PW-16; Ex.P-5: Account Opening Form;
Ex.P-6: Seizure Mahazar;;
Ex.P-6(a) : Signature of PW-6;40
C.C.No.25097/2018 Ex.P-6(b) : Signature of PW-7;
Ex.P-6(c) : Signature of PW-16; Ex.P-7: Statement of PW-6;
Ex.P-8: Statement of PW-7;
Ex.P-9: Seizure Mahazar;
Ex.P-9(a): Signature of PW-8;
Ex.P-9(b): Signature of PW-11; Ex.P10: Statement of PW-8;
Ex.P-11: Seizure Mahazar;;
Ex.P-11(a):Signature of PW-9; Ex.P-11(b):Signature of PW-10; Ex.P-12: Statement of PW-9;
Ex.P-13: Statement of PW-10;
Ex.P-14: Memorandum letter dated 28.06.2017; Ex.P-16: Seizure Mahazar;
Ex.P-16(a):Signature of PW-12; Ex.P-16(b):Signature of PW-13; Ex.P-17: Statement of PW-12;
Ex.P-18: Statement of PW-13;
Ex.P-19: Letter dated 24.08.2018; Ex.P-19(a):Signature of PW-14; Ex.P-20: Statement of PW-15;
Ex.P-21: FIR;
Ex.P-21(a):Signature of PW-16; Ex.P-22: Statement of PW-17.
Ex.P-23: FSL Report dated 05.03.2021. Ex.P-23(a):Signature of PW-18. 41
C.C.No.25097/2018
4. List of documents exhibited for the defense:
- NIL -
5. List of Materials objects exhibited for the prosecution:
- NIL -
(SIDDARAMA.S.) III ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, AT BENGALURU CITY.