Bangalore District Court
4. Name Of The 1.Shekar vs No.59/13 on 11 January, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE VIII ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
Dated this the 11th day of January 2016.
Present : Sri.D. Puttaswamy, B.A., LL.B.
VIII ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
C.C. NO.1880/2013
JUDGMENT U/S 355 OF THE Cr.P.C. 1973.
1. Sl. No. of the Case 1880/2013
2. The date of 04/07/2012
commission of the
offence
3. Name of the State by Sheshadripuram P.S.
complainant
4. Name of the 1.Shekar, S/o. Narayana Swamy,
accused No.59/13, 7th Cross, Pipe Line,
Malleshwaram, Bengaluru.
2.Raghu, S/o.Rangappa, 18
years, No.24, 4th Cross,
Vivekananda Block, PG Halli,
Bengaluru.
5. The offence U/sec.341, 326 r/w 34 of IPC.
complained of or
proved
6. Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
and his
examination
7. Final Order Acting U/sec. 248(1) Cr.PC
Accused-1 and 2 are acquitted.
8. Date of such order 11/01/2016
For the following:-
2
JUDGMENT
This is the charge sheet filed by the PSI of Sheshadripuram P.S. against the accused-1 and 2 for the offences punishable U/sec.341, 326 r/w 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that:
On 04/07/2012 at about 8.30 p.m. accused-1 and 2 in furtherance of common intention to commit an offence picked up quarrel with CW.1 and 2 near House No.1, situated at 4th Cross, Malleshwaram Link Road and in the above said transaction wrongfully restrained CW.1, accused-1 assaulted with cricket bat on the head of CW.1 and accused-2 assaulted with cricket bat on the nose and near the ear of CW.1 thereby caused grievous injuries to CW.1 and thereby committed the alleged offences.
3. Accused-1 and 2 are on bail. As required u/sec.207 of Cr.PC, the copies of the charge sheet papers were furnished to the accused. The accused on framing the charges, denied the charges and thereupon the prosecution was directed to lead the evidence on its side to prove the allegations. As such the prosecution examined PW:1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 4. On closure of the prosecution 3 evidence, as there was no incriminating evidence against the accused, the statement of the accused u/sec.313 Cr.PC is dispensed with.
4. I have heard the arguments from both the sides .
5. The following points that arise for my consideration are:
1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on 04/07/2012 at about 8.30 p.m. near House No.1, situated at 4th Cross, Malleshwaram Link Road, within jurisdiction of Sheshadripuram P.S., accused-1 and 2 have committed the offences punishable U/sec.341, 326 r/w 34 of IPC.?
2) What order?
6. My finding on the above points are held as under:
Point No.1 In the negative Point No.2 As per final order for the following:4
REASONS
7. Point No.1:-
In order to bring home the guilt of accused, the prosecution has examined PW.1. PW.1 has turned hostile in toto to the case of the prosecution. PW.1, who being the complainant in his evidence deposed that, he knows the accused persons, they have not wrongfully restrained him and not assaulted him with cricket bat and not caused any grievous injury. PW.1 further deposed that he has not given complaint before the police as per Ex.P1 and police have not drawn mahazars and not seized any property in his presence as per Ex.P2 and P3.
8. Even in the cross-examination by learned Sr.APP, PW.1 has not supported the case of the prosecution. In the cross- examination PW.1 has specifically denied for having given complaint and police have drawn mahazars. PW.1 further denied that he has given further statement before the police as per Ex.P4. This being the evidence of PW.1, it is fatal to the case of the prosecution.
5
9. Even though learned Sr.APP prayed for issuance of summons to other witnesses. As PW.1 being the material witness/victim has not supported the case of the prosecution, mere issuance of summons to other witnesses and examination of those witnesses would not serve the purpose of the prosecution and hence prayer of learned Sr.APP is rejected.
10. In the absence of cogent, corroborative and material evidence, it is not safe to come to conclusion that prosecution has proved the allegations against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, I answer point no.1 in the negative.
11. Point No.2:- In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section-248(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused-1 and 2 are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable U/sec.341, 326 r/w 34 of IPC. 6
Bail bonds of accused and their surety bonds stand cancelled.
(Dictated to the stenographer, transcript thereof, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court this the 11th day of January 2016.) (D. Puttaswamy) VIII Addl.C.M.M. Bengaluru.
Annexure:
1.List of Witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution: P. Ws:
1. Deelip Kumar.C.
2.List of Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:- Ex.Ps:
1. Complaint
2. Spot Mahazar
3. Seizure mahazar
4. Further statement of PW.1.
3.List of Material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:-
-NIL-
4.List of witnesses and documents marked on behalf of the accused:-
- NIL -
VIII Addl. C. M. M. Bangalore.