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 2, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

State By : Kodigehalli Police Station vs Abhijeeth R T S/O Thimmegowda on 25 April, 2023

 KABC030450362022




    IN THE COURT OF VII ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITIAN
              MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.

              Dated this the 25th day of April, 2023

            Present :       Sri.Umesha H.K., B.A.L.L.B.,
                            VII Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru.

                JUDGMENT U/s 355 of Cr.P.C.

                      C.C.No. 17160/2022

 Complainant         :   State by : Kodigehalli Police Station.
                         (By Sr.Asst.Public Prosecutor)


                             V/s

 Accused             :   Abhijeeth R T S/o Thimmegowda,
                         28         years,       R/at      No.20,
                         Sri.Lakshminarasimha     Swamy    Nilaya,
                         Nisarga Layout, 2nd Stage, Abbegere,
                         Bengaluru­90.
                         (By Sri. Anjana Murthy, Advocate)


Date of occurrence of offence                08.03.2022
Date of report of offence                    09.03.2022
Name of the Complainant                      Sri.Akashya.B.
Date of commencement of recording evidence   17.04.2023
                          2                    C.C.No.17160/2022




Date of closing of evidence                 17.04.03.2023
Offences complained of                      U/s 323, 326, 504 of
                                            I.P.C.
Opinion of the Judge                        Accused found not guilty.



       CW­16 P.S.I. of         Kodigehalli Police Station has
 filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences
 punishable U/s 323, 326, 504 of I.P.C.

     2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as under :

       It   is   alleged      in   the    chargesheet      that   on

 08.03.2022       at     about     11.30      a.m.,   within      the

 jurisdiction of       Kodigehalli   P.S, at Tatanagar Circle,

 accused in­connection with fast food business picked

 up quarrel with CW­1 abused him by using un­

 parlimentary words as "bole magne, soole magne ''

 and assaulted him and poured the boiled oil to CW­1

 and 2 due to which they sustained simple injury and

 assaulted with hands and                 thereby committed the

 offences punishable U/s 323, 326, 504 of I.P.C.

       3.     Upon the written information given by the

 Complainant       Crime       was       registered   in     Crime
                   3                C.C.No.17160/2022




No.56/2022, dated 09.03.2022 and investigation was

taken up. After the completion of the investigation, the

charge­sheet was submitted against the accused for

the aforementioned offences.

     4.    This Court by perusing the chargesheet

materials acting U/s 190 (1) (b) of Cr.P.C, has taken

cognizance for the offences U/s    323, 326, 504       of

I.P.C., and registered the case    as   CC and issued

summons to the accused.

     5.    In pursuance of the summons accused

appeared and he is on Court bail. The prosecution

papers were supplied to accused as required U/s. 207

of Cr.P.C. After hearing, the charge is framed against

the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claims

to be tried.
[\




     6.    The prosecution has examined P.W.1 and 2

and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P­4 on its behalf. Since,

the material witness i.e., Complainant/Injured      and
                     4                 C.C.No.17160/2022




Eye­witnesses have completely turned hostile, the

prayer of Ld.Sr.APP for issuance of summons to CW­3,

to 16 is rejected and evidence of CW­3         to 16      are

dropped. Since, there is no incrimanating evidence

against accused recording of 313 Statement dispensed.

     7.     Heard       the   arguments.   Perused        the
documents placed on record.


     8. The points that arise for consideration is :

          1. Whether the prosecution   proves
          beyond all reasonable    doubt that
          accused have committed an offences
          punishable U/s 323, 326, 504     of
          I.P.C.?

          2. What order ?

   9. The above points are answered as under :
     Point No.1: In the Negative.
     Point No.2: As per final order for the following :


                        REASONS
      10. Point No.1 : It is alleged in the chargesheet

on 08.03.2022 at about 11.30 a.m., within the
                    5               C.C.No.17160/2022




jurisdiction of Kodigehalli P.S, at Tata nagar Circle,

accused in­connection with fast food business picked

up quarrel with CW­1 abused him by using un­

parlimentary words as "bole magne, soole magne ''

and assaulted him and poured the boiled oil to CW­1

and 2 due to which they sustained simple injury and

assaulted with hands and       thereby committed the

offences punishable U/s 323, 326, 504 of I.P.C.

     11.    The prosecution in order to prove the guilt

of the accused has examined PW­1 to 4. PW­1 who is

the Complainant and Injured has completely turned

hostile and stated against to his complaint averments.

He further deposed he signed       Ex.P­1      about one

year's back at Kodigehalli P.S and he does not know

what is written in Ex.P­1. Police have not read over the

contents of Ex.P­1. During the cross­examination by

Ld.Sr.APP    he   completely   denied    the     material

suggestions of Ld.Sr.APP and specifically stated he has

not lodged the complaint as per Ex.P­1 and not given
                      6                C.C.No.17160/2022




re­statement as per Ex.P­2.       So, the hostile evidence

of PW­1 is of no use.

     12.    PW­2 who is also an injured and mahazar

witness completely turned hostile. Even during cross­

examination by Ld.Sr.APP he has not stated anything

about drawing of mahazar as per Ex.P­3 in his

presence and he specifically denied regarding giving of

Statement as per Ex.P­4.

     13. Except the hostile evidence of PW­1 and 2

there is nothing on record to show that accused has

committed the offences punishable U/s 323, 326, 504

of I.P.C.    Further, there is no evidence to show that

accused has winover the prosecution witness i.e., PW­

1 and 2. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that the

Prosecution    not       proved the guilt of the accused

beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, by extending the

benefit of doubt in favour of accused. I answer Point

No.1 in the Negative.
                             7                   C.C.No.17160/2022




       14. Point No.2 : In view of the discussion made

above, I proceed to pass the following :

                                 ORDER

Acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/s 323, 326, 504 of I.P.C.

Bail bonds and surety shall stand cancelled after the appeal period is over.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript computerized by him, revised, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this 25 th day of April, 2023).

( UMESHA H.K ) VII Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru.

A N N E X U R E S List of witnesses examined for the Complainant :

PW.1              Akshaya,
PW.2              Sunil.
                       8                      C.C.No.17160/2022




List of documents marked for the Complainant :

Ex.P.1        Statement,
Ex.P.2        Re-statement,
Ex.P.3        Spot-mahazar,
Ex.P.4        Statement.



List of witnesses examined for the Accused          Nil.
List of documents exhibited for the Accused         Nil.
List of Material Object marked for prosecution      Nil.




VII Addl.C.M.M.,Bengaluru.

9 C.C.No.17160/2022 10 C.C.No.17160/2022