Bangalore District Court
State By Yelahanka Police Station vs No.: 3. Govindaraj on 10 October, 2018
IN THE COURT OF THE 44TH ADDL.CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 10th day of OCTOBER 2018
:Present:
Smt. Mala N.D., B.A.L., LL.B.,
44th ACMM, Bengaluru
C.C.No.21588/2012
Complainant : State by Yelahanka Police station
(By Asst. Public Prosecutor)
-V/s-
Accused No.: 3. Govindaraj,
S/o Narayanappa,
Aged about 38 years,
R/at Anneshwara village & Post,
Devanahalli Taluk, Bengaluru.
(Case against accused No.1 and 2 is split up)
JUDGMENT
The PSI of Yelahanka Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused No.1 to 3 for the offences punishable U/s. 420 of IPC r/w Section 3, 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Regulation Act, 2000. 2 C.C. No.21588/2012
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
It is alleged that, C.W. 1 Sri. B. Ravi along with C.W. 2 to 5 on receipt of credible information conducted raid over accused persons' TVS Excel Super bearing No.KA-03-ED-1566, besides Anjaneya Swamy Temple road, Surabhi Layout, within the limits of Yelahanka police station, on 08/03/2012 at about 11.45 a.m. in the morning, found illegal possession of five gas cylinders of different companies by accused persons without holding any valid license, with a fraudulent intention of making an unlawful gain by selling the same for a higher prices to earn more profit and thereby cheated general public as well as different Gas Companies and committed aforesaid offences.
Therefore, based on the report of C.W. 1 Sri. B. Ravi, Police-sub-
inspector, Yelahanka Police Station, this case came to be registered against the accused. During the course of investigation I.O. visited the place of incident, drawn spot mahazar in the presence of the witnesses, seized item No.1 to 6 and subjected the same under P.F.No.35/2012, recorded the statement of witnesses and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against the accused for the aforesaid offences.3 C.C. No.21588/2012
3. The accused No.3 is on bail and he is represented through his counsel. Inspite of sufficient efforts, accused No.1 and 2 were not secured before this court. Hence, case against them is split up.
4. The copies of the prosecution papers have been furnished to the accused No.3 as required under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. The cognizance of the offences punishable U/sec. 420 of IPC r/w Section 3, 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Regulation Act, 2000, has been taken as per Sec.190 of Cr.P.C.
5. The charge is framed, contents of charge have been read over and explained to the accused No.3 in the language known to him, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the prosecution is called upon to prove its case.
6. The prosecution, in order to prove its case has examined C.W. 1 as P.W. 1 and got marked seven document at Ex.P1 to P.7. Though, the prosecution in order to prove its case has cited as many as 07 witnesses, except C.W. 1, none of the witnesses i.e. C.W. 2 to 7 have turned up before the court inspite of taking coercive steps like issuance of summons, warrants and even proclamation. It is to be observed that, the charge is framed in the year 2016 and till now C.W. 4 C.C. No.21588/2012 2 to 7 have been secured and no satisfactory explanation has been offered. Therefore, by considering the long standing pendency of the case, they have been discharged from deposing evidence.
7. After completion of prosecution side evidence, the statement of accused No.3 as required under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded, wherein accused has denied the incriminating evidence adduced against him and not chosen to lead his side defense evidence. Hence, the case is posted for arguments.
8. Heard both the side and perused the material evidence on record.
9. The following points would arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, C.W. 1 Sri. B. Ravi along with C.W. 2 to 5 on receipt of credible information conducted raid over accused persons' TVS Excel Super bearing No.KA-03-ED-1566, besides Anjaneya Swamy Temple road, Surabhi Layout, within the limits of Yelahanka police station, on 08/03/2012 at about 11.45 a.m. in the morning, found illegal possession of five gas cylinders of different companies by accused persons without holding any valid license, with a fraudulent intention of making an unlawful gain by selling the same for a higher prices to earn more profit and thereby cheated general public as well as different Gas Companies and thereby committed offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC r/w Section 3, 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 5 C.C. No.21588/2012 and Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Regulation Act, 2000?
2. What Order?
10. My findings on the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : IN THE NEGATIVE Point No.2: As per final order for the following REASONS
11.Point No.1: The prosecution in order to establish its case has cited as many as 07 witnesses and successful in examining only its complainant C.W. 1 as P.W. 1. This case has been registered on the back ground of accused persons illegally possessing five gas cylinders of different companies without holding any valid license, with a fraudulent intention of making unlawful gain, in order to sell the same to the general public on a higher price and thereby committed aforesaid offences.
12. In this connection complainant C.W. 1 is examined as P.W. 1, wherein he has deposed as per his complaint averments. He has also deposed about conducting mahazar and seizing cylinders and submitting report against accused No.3.
6 C.C. No.21588/2012
13. It is pertinent to note that, though C.W. 1 has deposed against accused No.3, to corroborate his evidence, none of the independent mahazar witnesses and eye witnesses have been examined before this court, which is a fatal blow to the prosecution case. Under such circumstances, in the absence of evidence of other material witnesses, this court cannot hold the accused No.3 as guilty minded. Therefore, benefit of doubt has to be extended in favour of accused No.3.
14. That apart, though the prosecution has cited as many as 07 witnesses, except C.W. 1, none of the witnesses i.e. C.W. 2 to 7 have turned up before the court inspite of taking coercive steps like issuance of summons, warrants and even proclamation. It is to be observed that, on 22/09/2016 this court has framed charge and this court has extended fullest assistance to secure the witnesses by issuing summons, warrants and even proclamation which can be seen from the order sheet. As such, by considering the long standing pendency of the case, they have been discharged from deposing the evidence. As a result, the prosecution has failed to prove the charge leveled against accused No.3 with cogent, convincing and 7 C.C. No.21588/2012 corroborative evidence. Therefore, above point No.1 is answered in the Negative.
15.Point No.2: In view of the negative findings on the above point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.3 is found not guilty and acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 420 of IPC r/w Section 3, 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Regulation Act, 2000.
The bail & bail bond of the accused and surety shall stands cancelled.
Item No.1 to 6 seized and subjected under P.F. No.35/2012, are ordered to be retained until disposal of split up case against accused No.1 and 2.
(Dictated to the Stenographer through computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 10th day of October 2018).
(Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.8 C.C. No.21588/2012
ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION P.W. 1: B. Ravi
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex.P. 1 : Notice Ex.P.1(a) : Signature of P.W. 1 Ex.P.2 : Mahazar Ex.P.2(a) : Signature of P.W. 1 Ex.P.3 : Report Ex.P.3(a) : Signature of P.W. 1 Ex.P.4&5 : Photos Ex.P.6&7 : Photos of vehicles
3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE NIL
4. LIST OF THE METERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION NIL (Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.9 C.C. No.21588/2012
Judgment pronounced in Open Court vide separate:-
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.3 is found not guilty and acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 420 of IPC r/w Section 3, 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Regulation Act, 2000.
The bail & bail bond of the accused and surety shall stands cancelled.
Item No.1 to 6 seized and subjected under P.F. No.35/2012, are ordered to be retained until disposal of split up case against accused No.1 and 2.
(Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.10 C.C. No.21588/2012