Bangalore District Court
Janardhana vs Sunil Kumar Alias Sunil Gowda on 25 July, 2025
KABC030589952020
Presented on : 27.11.2020
Registered on : 27.11.2020
Decided on : 25.07.2025
Duration : 04y/07m/28days
IN THE COURT OF XLI ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, AT : BENGALURU
PRESIDED OVER BY: TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA
B.A.,LL.B.,
XLI Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate
Bengaluru
Dated on this 25th day of July 2025
C.C.No.16538/2020
COMPLAINANT : The State
by Cubbon Park P.S
-V/s-
ACCUSED : 1. Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Gowda
S/o. Shivanna, Aged 30 years,
R/at. No.58, 1st cross,
Madduramma Colony,
Tavarkere, Bengaluru.
2. Singonahalli Sobagayya
S/o. Kuntaiah, Aged 45 years,
R/at. No.350, 50 feet Road,
Chowdeshwari Nagar, Laggere,
Bengaluru.
3. Raju
S/o. Bommegowda, Aged 32 years,
2 C.C.No.16538/2020
R/at.No.20/4, 7th cross,
Muninarasimaiah Garden,
Taverkere, Bengaluru.
Date of Commission of offence 14.09.2020
Date of report 15.09.2020
Date of arrest 24.09.2020
Name of the complainant Janardhan
Date of commencement of 26.09.2022
recording Evidence
Date of closing evidence 11.07.2025
Offences complained of U/Sec. 384, 419, 504 ,506, 511
R/w 34 of IPC.
State Represented by Senior Asst.Public Prosecutor
Accused Represented by Sri.H.C.Krishna and
R.Sujatha Advocates.
Opinion of the Judge As per final orders
JUDGMENT
[Delivered on 25.07.2025] The P.S.I of Amruthahalli police station has filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/Sec. 384, 419, 504 ,506, 511 R/w 34 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of prosecution case is as follows:
On 14.09.2019 at 2 p.m., the accused No.1 to 3 in furtherance of common intention went to Open Box Bar & Restaurant, situated at St. Marks road, pretended themselves as the officers of 3 C.C.No.16538/2020 excise department, asked CW.1 and 6 to show the documents of the restaurant, abused CW.6 in a filthy language, tried to extort the documents of the restaurant and threatened to show their identity cards to the media and not allow them to run the restaurant. On the basis of written information given by CW.1, the Cubbon Park Police have registered this case in Cr.No.78/2020.
3. On 24.09.2020, the accused No.1 and 3 were arrested and produced before the court. This court remanded them to judicial custody. As per order dated: 30.09.2020, the accused No.1 and 3 were enlarged on bail. By obtaining anticipatory bail from the Hon'ble Sessions Court, the accused No.2 appeared before the court on 22.02.2022 and got enlarged himself on bail.
4. After the investigation, the IO filed charge sheet against the accused. The Court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable U/Sec.384, 419, 504 ,506, 511 R/w 34 of IPC. The Court complied with Sec.207 of Cr.P.C., and furnished charge sheet copies to accused No.1 to 3.
4 C.C.No.16538/2020
5. The Court heard both the parties. As there were no grounds to discharge the accused, the Court framed charges for the offences punishable U/Sec.384, 419, 504 ,506, 511 R/w 34 of IPC. The accused did not plead guilty. They claimed to be tried.
6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined one witness as PW.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 and 2 documents. After the closure of the evidence of the prosecution, this court recorded the statements of the accused No.1 to 3 U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C., wherein, they denied the incriminating evidence led against them. They did not choose to lead their defense evidence.
7. I have heard the arguments of Senior APP and Sri. H.C.K & Smt. Sujatha Advocates.
8. On the basis of allegations made against the accused, the following points arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused No.1 to 3 in furtherance of common intention went to Open Box Bar & Restaurant, 5 C.C.No.16538/2020 situated at St. Marks road on 14.09.2019 at 2 p.m., pretended themselves as the officers of excise department and asked CW.1 and 6 to show the documents of the restaurant and thereby they have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.419 r/w 34 of IPC ?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused in furtherance of common intention abused CW.6 in a filthy language and thereby they have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.504 r/w 34 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused in furtherance of common intention tried to extort the documents of the restaurant from CW.1 and 6 and thereby they have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.384, 511 r/w.34 of IPC?6 C.C.No.16538/2020
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused in furtherance of common intention threatened CW.1 and 6 to show their identity cards to the media and not allow them to run the restaurant and thereby they have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.506 r/w 511 of IPC?
5. What order?
9. My answers to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In Negative
Point No.2 : In Negative
Point No.3 : In Negative
Point No.4 : In Negative
Point No.5 : As per final orders for the following:
REASONS
Point No.1 to 4:As all these points are interrelated, I take all the four points together for common discussion to avoid repetition.
10. The burden is casted on the prosecution to prove that, the accused No.1 to 3 in furtherance of common intention went to 7 C.C.No.16538/2020 Open Box Bar & Restaurant, situated at St. Marks road on 14.09.2019 at 2 p.m., pretended themselves as the officers of excise department, asked CW.1 and 6 to show the documents of the restaurant, abused CW.6 in a filthy language, tried to extort the documents of the restaurant and threatened to show their identity cards to the media and not allow them to run the restaurant.
11. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined the officer, who arrested accused No.1 and 2/CW.12 as PW.1 and got marked the photograph of the vehicle as Ex.P.1 and report given by PW.1 as Ex.P.2.
12. CW.12/PW.1 -Krishna Murthy S.N., in his evidence has stated that, while he was working as Head constable at Cubbon Park police station on 23.09.2020, the CW.14 deputed him and CW.13 to trace out the accused. When they contacted the informants, they learnt that the accused are available near St. Joseph college compound, Museum road by parking white colored Etioz car. Accordingly, they went to that spot at 3.30 to 4 p.m., caught hold of 2 persons and on enquiry, they told their 8 C.C.No.16538/2020 names as Sunil Gowda S/o. Shivanna and Raju S/o. Bommegowda. After confirming their identity, they took them to the station at 4.30 p.m., and produced them before CW.14. He has identified the accused No.1 and 2. Ex.P.1 is the photograph of the car, which was found with accused No.1 and 2. He gave Ex.P.2 report in this regard.
13. On the basis of written information given by CW.1, on 15.09.2020 at 2.05 p.m. the Cubbon park police have registered this case, investigated the matter and filed charge sheet against the accused. In the written information, the CW.1 explained the incident in detail as to how 3 unknown persons pretending themselves as the excise officers came to their restaurant on 14.09.2020, how they threatened them and the manner in which they tried to extort the documents of their restaurant.
14. In order to ascertain the correctness of the allegations made in the written information given by CW.1, this Court had issued repeated summon, non-bailable warrants and proclamations against CW.1 to 11. Inspite of it, the prosecution has not secured 9 C.C.No.16538/2020 their presence. By noting the absence of the witnesses and age of the case, this Court dropped them from examination. The prosecution has given up CW.13. Senior APP prayed the Court to issue process afresh against CW.14. This Court rejected his prayer as the prime witnesses are dropped from examination. Accordingly, the Court dropped CW.14 from examination.
15. In the present case neither the complainant nor eye witnesses no pancha witnesses appeared before the Court to substantiate the case of the prosecution. The PW.1 deposed about arrest of accused No.1 and 2. However, his version is not supported by the oral evidence of any independent witnesses. In the present case, no witnesses appeared before the Court to say that, they have seen the accused entering Open Box Bar & Restaurant on 14.09.2019 at 2p.m., which is situated at St. Marks road and tried to extort documents of the restaurant by pretending themselves as excise officials and threatened CW.1 and 6 with dire consequences.
10 C.C.No.16538/2020
16. In the absence of oral evidence of independent witnesses and eye witnesses, the evidence led by PW.1 appears to be baseless. From his evidence, the charges levelled against the accused are not proved. His evidence is not helpful to the case of the prosecution to hold the accused guilty of the offences. There is no convincing evidence on record to connect the accused with the alleged crime.
17. Thus, the prosecution has utterly failed to prove that, the accused No.1 to 3 in furtherance of common intention went to Open Box Bar & Restaurant, situated at St. Marks road on 14.09.2019 at 2 p.m., pretended themselves as the officers of excise department, asked CW.1 and 6 to show the documents of the restaurant, abused CW.6 in a filthy language, tried to extort the documents of the restaurant and threatened to show their identity cards to the media and not allow them to run the restaurant. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 to 4 in Negative. Point No.5: For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass the following:
11 C.C.No.16538/2020
ORDER By exercising the powers conferred U/Sec.248[1] of Cr.P.C., the accused No.1 to 3 are acquitted from the charges of Sec.384, 419, 504, 506, 511 r/w.34 of IPC. Bail bonds executed by accused No.1 to 3 stands cancelled.Bonds executed by accused No.1 to 3
U/Sec.437[A] of Cr.P.C., shall be in force for a period of 6 months. Digitally signed by TATTANDA TATTANDA DAMAYANTI DAMAYANTI SOMAIAH Date: 2025.07.25 17:47:23 SOMAIAH +0530 25.07.2025 [TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA] XLI A.C.J.M., BENGALURU 12 C.C.No.16538/2020 ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
PW.1 : Krishnamurthy S.N LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 : Photograph of the car Ex.P.2 : Report given by PW.1 Ex.P.2[a] : Signature of PW.1
LIST OF M.O's MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION :
NIL LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE ACCUSED :
NIL LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE ACCUSED : NIL ....................................................................................
Dictated on : 25.07.2025 Transcribed on : 25.07.2025 checked on : 25.07.2025 Signed on : 25.07.2025 [TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA] XLI A.C.J.M., BENGALURU Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app "eCourts Services" from Android or iOS