Bangalore District Court
State By J.P. Nagar Police Station vs Satish @ Kadupapa on 18 August, 2018
IN THE COURT OF THE 44TH ADDL.CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 18th day of AUGUST 2018
:Present:
Smt. Mala N.D., B.A.L., LL.B.,
44th ACMM, Bengaluru
C.C.No.25640/2012
Complainant : State by J.P. Nagar Police station
(By Sr. Asst. Public Prosecutor)
-V/s-
Accused : 1. Satish @ Kadupapa,
S/o Late. Shankara,
Aged about 28 years,
R/at 5th Cross,
Andhrahalli, Kalika Nagar,
Peenya II Stage, Bengaluru.
(Case against accused No.2 is split up)
(A.3 pleaded guilty)
(Represented by Sri. Ravi Kumar.S.L. advocate )
JUDGMENT
The PSI of J.P. Nagar Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused No.1 to 3 for the offence punishable U/s. 380 of IPC. 2 C.C. No.25640/2012
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
It is alleged that, on 19/09/2011 at about 12 p.m. in the afternoon, accused persons entered the house of C.W. 1 Sri. Shashidhar, situated at 2nd and 4th Cross Galli, Muniyappa's compound, Trishul School Road, 6 th Phase, J.P. Nagar, Bengaluru, within the limits of J.P. Nagar police station, through an open door, committed theft of one gold chain and one finger ring worth Rs.35,000/- which was kept on deewana and thereby committed aforesaid offence. Therefore, C.W.1 Sri. Shashidhar has lodged complaint before the jurisdictional police. As such, this case came to be registered against accused persons. Thereafter, I.O. visited the place of incident, drawn spot mahazar as well as seizure mahazar, seized the articles involved in this case, recorded the statement of witnesses and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against accused persons for the aforesaid offence.
3. The accused No.1 is on bail and he is represented through his counsel. In spite of sufficient efforts, accused No.2 is not secured before this court. Hence, case against him is split up. Accused No.3 has pleaded his guilt on 24/06/2016. 3 C.C. No.25640/2012
4. The copies of the prosecution papers have been furnished to the accused No.1 as required under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. The cognizance of the offence punishable U/sec. 380 of IPC 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.1 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. Though, the prosecution in order to prove its case has cited as many as 15 witnesses, except C.W. 4, 8, 2, 3, 13 and 5 none of the witnesses i.e. C.W. 1, 6, 7, 9 to 12, 14 and 15 have turned up before the court inspite of taking coercive steps like issuance of summons and warrants . It is to be observed that, the charge is framed in the year 2014 and till now C.W. 1, 6, 7, 9 to 12, 14 and 15 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.1 as required under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded, wherein he has denied the incriminating evidence adduced 4 C.C. No.25640/2012 against him and he has 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, on 19/09/2011 at about 12 p.m. in the afternoon, accused persons entered the house of C.W. 1 Sri. Shashidhar, nd situated at 2 and 4rd Cross Galli, Muniyappa's compound, Trishul School Road, 6th Phase, J.P. Nagar, Bengaluru, within the limits of J.P. Nagar police station, through an open door, committed theft of one gold chain and one finger ring worth Rs.35,000/- which was kept on deewana and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 380 of IPC?
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: In this case, accused has been alleged of committing theft of one gold chain and one finger ring worth Rs.35,000/- which was kept on deewana belonging to C.W. 1 5 C.C. No.25640/2012 Sri. Shashidhar, from his house situated at 2 nd and 4th Cross Galli, Muniyappa's compound, Trishul School Road, 6 th Phase, J.P. Nagar, Bengaluru.
12. The complainant is one Sri. Shashidhar who has set the law into motion has failed to appear before the court to put forth his case against accused No.1, which is a fatal blow to the prosecution case.
13. One official witness is examined as P.W. 2, wherein he has deposed about apprehending of accused No.1 and producing him before his SHO along with a report, which is not of much important in the absence of evidence of other material witnesses.
14. In addition, three mahazar witnesses are examined as P.W. 3, 4 and 6, wherein they have totally turned hostile, not deposed anything against accused No.1 and thereby not supported the case of prosecution. On the other hand, they have only identified their respective signatures on the mahazars by pleading their ignorance about its contents. As such, nothing substantial has been elicited in their cross-examination.
15. One more witness i.e. retired bank manager of Muthoot Fin Corp is also examined as P.W. 1, wherein he has deposed about handing over some of the gold ornaments to J.P. Nagar police. On the 6 C.C. No.25640/2012 contrary, he has failed to identify the said gold ornaments, as such, nothing substantial has been elicited in his cross-examination.
16.That apart, one more official witness is examined as P.W. 5, wherein he has deposed about registering of complaint, forwarding of FIR to his higher authority as well as to the court and handing over the case file to C.W. 15 for further investigation. In the absence of material evidence of complainant and other independent witnesses, the evidence of this witness is not helpful to the prosecution in establishing its case against accused. Under the circumstances, this court cannot hold accused No.1 as guilty minded.
17. Moreover, though the prosecution has cited as many as 15 witnesses, except C.W. 4, 8, 2, 3, 13 and 5 none of the witnesses i.e. C.W. 1, 6, 7, 9 to 12, 14 and 15 have turned up before the court inspite of taking coercive steps like issuance of summons and warrants. It is to be observed that, on 06/01/2014 this court has framed charge and this court has extended fullest assistance to secure the witnesses by issuing summons and warrants which can be seen from the order sheet. Therefore, by considering the long standing pendency of the case, they have been discharged from deposing the evidence. As such, the prosecution has failed to prove its 7 C.C. No.25640/2012 case against accused No.1 beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, benefit of doubt has to be extended in favour of accused No.1. As a result, the prosecution has failed to prove the charges leveled against accused No.1 with cogent, convincing and corroborative evidence. Therefore, above point No.1 is answered in the Negative.
18.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.1 is found not guilty and acquitted of the offence punishable U/s. 380 of IPC.
The bail & bail bond of the accused No.1 and surety shall stands cancelled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer through computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 18th day of August 2018).
(Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.8 C.C. No.25640/2012
ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION P.W. 1: Ananda Shetty P.W. 2: Soorachar P.W. 3: Sampath P.W. 4: Basavaraju P.W. 5: K.T. Chandrappa P.W. 6: Ashok
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex.P. 1 : Statement of P.W. 1 Ex.P. 2 : Seizure Mahazar Ex.P.2(a) : Signature of P.W. 6 Ex.P.3 : Spot mahazar Ex.P.3(a) : Signature of P.W. 3 Ex.P.3(b) : Signature of P.W. 4 Ex.P.4 : Report of P.W. 2 Ex.P.4(a) : Signature of P.W. 2 Ex.P.5 : Complaint Ex.P.5(a) : Signature of P.W. 5 Ex.P.6 : FIR Ex.P.6(a) : Signature of P.W. 5
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.25640/2012
Judgment pronounced in Open
Court vide separate:-
ORDER
Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 is found not guilty and acquitted of the offence punishable U/s. 380 of IPC.
The bail & bail bond of the accused No.1
and surety shall stands cancelled.
(Mala N.D)
XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
10 C.C. No.25640/2012