Bangalore District Court
Shall Produce The Golden Ornaments As ... vs No.1 And 2 Are Set At on 9 November, 2020
IN THE COURT OF XXXII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE
PRESENT: SRI.HATTIKAL PRABHU.S.
M.A., LL.M.,
DATED THIS THE 09th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020
Serial Number of the case C.C.8629/2013
Name of the complainant State by Police Sub Inspector
Girinagar Police station
(Reptd. by Sr.Asst.Public
Prosecutor )
Name of the accused 1.Smt. Kalpana,
person W/o.Shivaraju,
Aged about 38 years,
R/at.No.1/8, 9th main,
Venkatappa Layout,
Hosakerehalli, Bangalore.
2).Rajendra Singh @ Raju,
R/at. C/o.Ganesh Jewelers,
Opp.Bus stand, near
Gangamma Temple,
Hesarghatta main road,
Chikkabanavara,
BAngalore
Date of commencement In between 01.03.2012 and
of offence 28.02.2013
Offences complained of U/s 420 and 411 of the IPC.
Date of arrest of accused A1-01.03.2013
A2-09.01.2014
Date of release of A1- 11.03.2013
accused on bail A2-16.01.2014
2 C.C.8629/2013
Date of commencement 08.11.2017
of recording evidence
Date of closure of 03.12.2018
recording evidence
Offences Proved Nil
Plea of the accused on Not guilty
their examination :
Final Order : Accused no.1 and 2 are
acquitted of the offences U/s
420 and 411 of the IPC.
Date of final order 09.11.2020
JUDGMENT
U/Sec.355 of the Cr.P.C., P.S.I Girinagar P.S. submitted this charge sheet against accused no.1 and 2 for the offences punishable U/Sec.420 and 411 of the IPC in Cr.No.63/2013.
2. In brief, case of the prosecution runs thus:-
2(a). The accused no.1 -Smt.Kalpana approached the C.W.1-Smt.Nagarathna and made C.W.1 to believe that the accused no.1 having sites and she is going to give two sites to the C.W.1 and the accused no.1 asked Rs.60,00,000/-(Rupees Sixty Lakhs only). 3 C.C.8629/2013
b). The C.W.1 believing the words of accused no.1 paid Rs. 40,00,000/-(Rupees Forty Lakhs only) during the period of one year at the house of C.W.1 situated at 10th cross, 2nd phase, Girinagar(house no.951/459). The C.W.1 in addition to the above said cash handed over her golden ornaments to the accused no.1 and also the C.W.1 given golden ornaments weighing 99.520 grams which belonged to the C.W.10-Smt.Padma who is relative of C.W.1.
c). The accused no.1 after obtaining the above said golden ornaments pledged the said golden ornaments (belonging to C.W.10) at Ganesh Jewelers and Bankers which is owned by accused no.2 by name Sri.Rajendra Singh. The accused no.1 pledged the ornaments with C.W.12 to 16. The accused no.1 after taking the cash of Rs. 60,00,000/-(Rupees Sixty Lakhs) and golden ornaments failed to give sites to the C.W.1 as he had promised. The accused neither returned the money taken from C.W.1 nor given sites and thereby the accused no.1 cheated the C.W.1. 4 C.C.8629/2013
d). After investigation the I.O submitted charge sheet against accused no.1 and 2 showing accused no.2 as absconding. After registering the criminal case, non bailable warrant was issued against the accused no.2.
Thereafter the I.O secured accused no.2, arrested him and after further investigation he submitted additional charge sheet against accused no.1 and 2, explaining the role of the accused no.2 and mentioning other witnesses -C.W.25 to 29 in the charge sheet.
e). In the charge sheet it is alleged that the accused no.2 knowing fully well that the accused no.1 obtained the golden ornaments fraudulently from C.W.1 and the accused no.2 received the golden ornaments weighing 99.520 grams from the accused no.1 under pledge. During investigation I.O recovered the golden ornaments weighing 99.520 grams from the possession of the accused no.2 and submitted P.F in P.F.No.06/2014.
f). During course of investigation, the I.O also recovered other golden ornaments. The I.O submitted P.F showing in all 5 golden ornaments at item no.1 to 5 5 C.C.8629/2013 in P.F. No.14/13 dated 01.03.2013. It is case of the prosecution that these ornaments are recovered from the possession of C.W.12-Sri.Dharmesh S/o.Parasmul Jain since same were received by the C.W.12 from the accused no.1 under pledge.
g). Seizure of item no.1 to 9 golden ornaments is reported under P.F.No.15/2013 said to be recovered from the possession of the Manager of Manappuram finance by name Muniyappa who is cited as C.W.13 in the charge sheet.
h). The seizure of item no. 1 to 3-golden ornaments is reported under P.F.No.16/2013 dated 07.03.2013. It is case of the prosecution that these golden ornaments are recovered from the jewelry shop of C.W.14- Sri.Pavan.
i)The seizure of item no.1 to 5 golden ornaments is reported under P.F.No.17/2013 dated 07.03.2013. It is case of the prosecution that these ornaments are recovered from the possession of the jewelry shop of C.W.15-Sri.Hinduram.
6 C.C.8629/2013
j). Seizure of item no.1 to 6-golden ornaments is reported under P.F.No.22/2013 dated 19.03.2013. It is case of the prosecution that said ornaments are recovered from the possession of C.W.16 who is owner of the Dhanaji Enterprises.
k).It is case of the prosecution that the above said golden ornaments are seized based on the information given by the accused no.1 since said golden ornaments were pledged by the accused no.1 and since the said golden ornaments were procured by the accused no.1 fraudulently from the C.W.1.
l). It is the case of the prosecution that the accused no.1 by playing fraud on C.W.1 obtained cash and jewelries and thereby committed the offence punishable U/s 420 of the IPC. Further it is case of the prosecution that the accused no.2 knowing fully well that the accused no.1 obtained golden ornaments fraudulently and he received the golden ornaments under pledge by accused no.1 and thereby committed the offence of " dishonestly receiving the stolen 7 C.C.8629/2013 property, knowing it to be stolen" and committed the offence punishable U/s 411 of the IPC.
3. After submitting the charge sheet cognizance of the alleged offence is taken and criminal case against the accused No.1 and 2 came to be registered. By furnishing the copies of the charge sheet to accused no.1 and 2. Sec. 207 of Cr.P.C is duly complied. After hearing before charge, this court finds sufficient reasons to proceed further. Accordingly charge is framed and read over to the accused no.1 and 2. Both accused no.1 and 2 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence matter is posted for recording evidence on behalf of prosecution.
4. On behalf of prosecution, the C.W.1- informant of crime herself is examined as P.W.1 and documents Ex.P1 and 2 are got marked.
5. After closure of the prosecution evidence the accused no.1 and 2 are examined U/s.313(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. Each and every incriminating circumstances 8 C.C.8629/2013 found in the evidence of the prosecution against the accused are separately read over to the accused No.1 and 2. The accused no.1 and 2 denied all such circumstances as false. The accused no.1 did not choose to adduce defense evidence and no documents are got marked on behalf of accused no.1. Accused no.2 himself entered the witness box and examined as D.W.1 and got marked the document as Ex.D.1.
6. Heard both sides.
7. Now the point that arise for the determination of this court are:
1). "Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused no.1 made C.W.1 to believe that she having landed property and induced the C.W.1 to give cash and on the said inducement the C.W.1 given Rs. 40,00,000/- cash and the accused no.1 procured the ornaments from the C.W.1 and taken Rs.6,00,000/- by pledging the same with C.W.12 to 16 and accused no.2 thereby the accused no.1 committed the offence of "cheating" which is punishable U/S 420 of the IPC.?
2). "Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable 9 C.C.8629/2013 doubt that the accused no.2 received the golden ornaments which are mentioned in P.F.No.06/2014 knowing that the said ornaments were procured by the accused no.1 fraudulently and thereby committed the offence offence of " dishonestly receiving the stolen property, knowing it to be stolen" and committed the offence punishable U/s 411 of the IPC?"
3). What order?
My finding on the above said points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Negative Point No.2: In the Negative Point No.3: As per final order for the following.....
REASONS
8. Point No.1: In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the C.W.1- informant of crime
-Smt.Nagarathna examined as P.W.1. In the chief examination the P.W.1 deposed that she herself and accused no.1 were working together in the garments and about 4 years back, the accused no.1 approached her for hand loan of Rs.20,000/-. Further she deposed 10 C.C.8629/2013 that she pledged her golden ornaments and given hand loan of Rs.20,000/- to the accused no.1. Further P.W.1 deposed that the accused no.1 pretended as if she is having landed property worth five crores and she asked for Rs. 50,00,000/-(Rupees fifty lakhs only) assuring her to return/give Rs.1,00,00,000/-(Rupees One Crore). Further P.W.1 deposed that she believed the words of the accused no.1 and raised funds from her relatives and she gave Rs.50,00,000/-(Rupees Fifty lakhs) to the accused no.1. Further the P.W.1 explained that the accused no.1 did not repay the loan amount and she cheated her. Further P.W.1 deposed that she went to Girinagar police station and lodged complaint as per Ex.P.1 and thereafter police drew mahazar on the spot as per Ex.P.2.
9. The P.W.1 in the chief examination itself failed to depose as per case of the prosecution. At that juncture learned Sr.Asst. Public Prosecutor prayed for time for further chief examination and accordingly further chief examination was deferred. On 07.07.2018 further chief examination of P.W.1 is recorded and in the 11 C.C.8629/2013 evidence she explained that the accused no.1 assured her to give site for lesser price and she gave money to accused no.1 on different dates. Further P.W.1 deposed that she pledged her jewelries and jewelries of her relatives and given money to the accused. Further P.W.1 deposed that accused shown the sites belonging to others and later failed to give sites and cheated her. Further P.W.1 explained that thereafter police recovered 450 grams of golden ornaments and she received the same for her interim custody. The photos of the golden ornaments are identified by the witness and same are marked as Ex.P.3 and 4.
10. Even in the further chief examination also, the P.W.1 failed to depose the case of the prosecution. Since evidence of P.W.1 in the chief examination is contrary to the case of the prosecution, learned Sr.Asst. Public Prosecutor requested the court to treat the witness as hostile witness. Hence permission is granted. In the cross examination made by learned Sr.Asst. Public Prosecutor , the P.W.1 admitted that as per her statement in the complaint, one Rajesh and one 12 C.C.8629/2013 Dilip were present when she handed over cash to the accused no.1. Further P.W.1 admitted that she paid Rs.60,00,000/-(Rupees Sixty Lakhs) to accused no.1. Further she expressed her ignorance as to relationship between accused no.1 and 2.
11. In the cross examination made on behalf of accused no.2 at page no.5 to 7 in para 3, 5, 7 and 8 the P.W.1 deposed as under:
" 3. I was getting Rs. 8,000/- to 9,000/- salary in the year 2011-12 out of my work in garments. It is true that the salary which was I getting by me was meagre salary and it was difficult to me to run my family out of salary".
"5. It is true that I have seen the accused No.2-Rajendra Singh 1st time in the Court. It is true that I did not see the accused no.2 before seeing him in the Court. It is true that there is no any transaction between me and accused no.2 directly"
" 7.Ex.P.2-Mahazar is shown to the witness. I signed Ex.P.2(a)-Signature in the police station. I do not know the contents of Ex.P.2-Mahazar".
"8.C.W.10 pledged golden ornaments in the shop of accused no.2. Witness not answering to the suggestion that C.W.10 pledged her ornaments in the shop of accused no.2 and taken Rs.2,04,000/- for her necessity as a secured loan. Witness again answered that she do not know. I do not know that accused no.2 issued receipt to C.W.10 for pledging ornaments. I do not know that C.W.10 was 13 C.C.8629/2013 arrested by Girinagar Police and Upparpet Police."
12. After going through the entire evidence of P.W.1, it is crystal clear that as per oral say of P.W.1, she herself pledged the ornaments with C.W.12 to 16 and received the money and handed over the money to accused no.1. Further P.W.1 admitted that C.W.10 pledged her ornaments with accused no.2 and C.W.10 herself received pledged amount. According to the case of the prosecution, the accused no.1 procured ornaments from the C.W.1 and accused no.1 herself pledged the ornaments and taken money of Rs. 6,00,000/-. But the evidence of P.W.1-prime witness is contrary to the case of the prosecution.
13. The prosecution failed to secure other witnesses inspite of giving sufficient oppportunities. The prosecution failed to produce any documents to show that the C.W.1 handed over money to the accused no.1. Financial capacity of P.W.1 to give money of Rs.50,00,000/-(Rupees Fifty Lakhs or Rs.60,00,000/-(Rupees Sixty Lakhs) is also not proved. 14 C.C.8629/2013 The P.W.1 herself deposed that by pledging her golden ornaments she gave hand loan of Rs. 20,000/- to the accused no.1. Such being the financial capacity of the C.W.1 it is clear that the C.W.1 is having no financial capacity to give huge sums of money i.e Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakhs) or Rs.60,00,000/-(Rupees Sixty Lakhs). Further this court observed that as per the case of the prosecution, C.W.1 believed the words of the accused no.1 as to owning property and gave money. This type of behavior is not of a prudent man. In the absence of establishing special circumstances, the case of the prosecution as to belief of C.W.1 is not acceptable one. In the cross examination, P.W.1 expressed her ignorance as to registration of number of criminal case against C.W.10. As per case of the prosecution, the C.W.1 taken ornaments from C.W.10 and handed over the same to the accused no.1. During course of trial, the accused no.1 took up defence of total denial of the case of the prosecution. The entire burden is on the prosecution to prove that 15 C.C.8629/2013 the accused no.1 fraudulently received the cash and golden ornaments and cheated the C.W.1.
14. At this juncture I would like to reproduce Sec.415 and 420 of the IPC, which reads as under:
Sec.415. Cheating.--Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to "cheat".
Sec.420.Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.-Whoever, cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine".
15. In order to prove the ingredients of the offence of cheating the prosecution has to prove that the accused no.1 induced the C.W.1 to give cash and ornaments and accordingly C.W.1 given cash and 16 C.C.8629/2013 ornaments to the accused no.1. As I have above discussed in detail, the evidence of P.W.1 is contrary to the case of the prosecution and not inspiring confidence to believe the say of P.W.1. As I have above stated no documents are placed on record to prove that the C.W.1 handed over money and ornaments to the accused no.1. As I have above mentioned the oral evidence of P.W.1 indicates that she herself pledged the ornaments and handed over the money. Under these circumstances, this court comes to the clear conclusion that evidence of P.W.1 is not trust worthy and cannot be relied upon. As I have above mentioned the prosecution failed to secure other witnesses even after giving sufficient opportunities and even after taking coercive steps. Further it is noticed that when the prosecution evidence is taken as closed, liberty was given to the prosecution to secure and examine the witnesses before pronouncing judgment. Even then no steps are taken by the prosecution to secure and examine the other witnesses. 17 C.C.8629/2013
16. For the reasons discussed above, this court comes to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused no.1 committed the offence of cheating punishable U/s 420 of the IPC. Accordingly I answer the point no.1 in the Negative.
17. Point no.2: According to the case of the prosecution, the accused no.1 taken ornaments from the C.W.1 which belonged to C.W.10 and pledged the same with accused no.2. According to the case of the prosecution, the accused no.2 knowing well that the accused no.1 secured the ornaments fraudulently, received the same and committed the offence U/s 411 of the IPC. As I have above mentioned in detail while discussing on point no.1, the P.W.1 in her evidence deposed that she herself pledged the ornaments and handed over the money to accused no.1. Further P.W.1 admitted that C.W.10 herself pledged ornaments and received pledge amount. This aspect is absolutely contrary to the case of the prosecution. Apart from that absolutely no evidence is placed on record to establish the knowledge of accused no.2 as to source of 18 C.C.8629/2013 ornaments. Absolutely no evidence is placed on record to establish that the accused no.2 committed the offence U/s 411 of the IPC. On the other hand, the accused no.2 himself entered the witness box and examined as D.W.1. This D.W.1 in his evidence deposed that in the year 2012, C.W.10-Smt. B.N.Padma pledged golden ornaments weiging 99.900 grams in his shop and taken loan of Rs.2,04,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs Four Thousand). Further he deposed that as per information given by C.W.10 she was in need of money for medical expenses. Further D.W1 deposed that C.W.10 was known person to him. The D.W.1 got marked the copy of the receipt issued to the C.W.10 and same is marked as Ex.D.1. Learned Sr.Asst. Public Prosecutor cross examined the witness at length. In the lengthy cross examination of D.W.1 nothing has been elicited to disbelieve or suspect the say of D.W.1. Apart from that according to the case of the prosecution itself ornaments were pledged with accused no.2 for Rs 2,04,000/-. Apart from that the P.W.1 in her evidence categorically admitted that C.W.10 herself pledged the 19 C.C.8629/2013 ornaments with accused no.2. Under these circumstances, absolutely no reasons are found to disbelieve the say of D.W.1 or contents of Ex.D.1- receipt. Hence the evidence placed on record clearly establishes that the accused no.2 is innocent and not committed any offence as alleged against him. Accordingly I answer point no.2 in the Negative.
18. Point No.3: In view of my finding on point no.1 and 2, the accused no.1 and 2 are entitled for acquittal. Now another question which arises for my consideration is what is the order for final disposal of the property?. As I have above mentioned the I.O. seized the golden ornaments from the possession of the C.W.12 to 16 and accused no.2 based on the information given by accused no.1 on the ground that said ornaments were pledged by the accused no.1 and said ornaments were procured by the accused no.1 by playing fraud on the C.W.1. In this case, the main offence alleged against accused no.1 is U/Sec.420 of the IPC. As I have discussed in detail the evidence of P.W.1-prime witness is contrary to the case of the 20 C.C.8629/2013 prosecution and it is held that the evidence of P.W.1 is not reliable and trust worthy. Under these circumstances, no doubt it is just and proper to return the property to the person from whom they are seized.
19. On looking to the order sheet this court noticed that the C.W.1- informant of crime filed interim application to get released the golden ornaments during crime stage itself. As per order dated 16.03.2013 the interim application of C.W.1-Smt.Nagarathna U/Secs. 451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C came to be allowed and it was ordered to release the golden ornaments- item no. 1 to 9 under P.F.No.14/2013, item no.1 to 5 in item no. 15/2013, Item no.1 to 3 under P.F.No.16/2012, item no.1 to 5 under P.F.No.17/2012 to the interim custody of the petitioner subject to the conditions including the condition that " in case if any rival claim is filed by anybody then petitioner shall surrender the property before police and shall seek fresh interim custody as per law". Thereafter C.W.12 by name DharmeshParasmul filed application U/Sec.451 and 457 of the Cr.P.C seeking to release the golden ornaments 21 C.C.8629/2013 which are seized by the I.O and reported in P.F.No.14/2013 and 15/2013. As per order dated 23.03.2013 this application came to be rejected by this Court with opinion that detailed trial is required to decide the entitlement of the parties for release of the golden ornaments. In the said order this court further made the following order " order dated 16.03.2013 granting interim custody of the properties passed in favor of the complainant is kept in abeyance till commencement of the trial".
20. After this order it was ordered to put up the file after final report. On 06.06.2013 the charge sheet came to be filed and NBW against accused no.1 and 2 was issued and thereafter on 21.06.2013 on behalf of C.W.1-Smt.Nagarathna, application for advancement is filed and on 09.07.2013 another advancement application is filed and on 10.07.2013, C.W.1 executed indemnity bond and accordingly release intimation was issued as per order dated 16.03.2013. It appears that in between the order dated 23.03.2013 and order dated 10.07.2013 the Presiding Officer is changed. It appears 22 C.C.8629/2013 that at the time of taking indemnity bond and issuance of release intimation the order dated 23.03.2013 is not noticed by the court.
21. Thereafter another interim application is filed by C.W.1-Smt.Nagarathna seeking release of the golden ornaments ie., item no.1 to 6 under P.F.No.22/2013 and this application is also allowed subject to the conditions including the condition that "
applicant shall produce the golden ornaments as and when directed by the Court".
22. On 11.4.2014 another interim application is filed seeking release of the golden ornaments by the C.W.1-Nagarathna relating to the item no.1 to 6 under P.F.No.6/2014. This application also came to be allowed subject to the conditions as per order dated 23.04.2014 including the condition that " the applicant shall produce the golden ornaments as and when directed by the Court". On 25.05.2014 indemnity bond is executed and release intimation has been issued. 23 C.C.8629/2013
23. Further this court observed that another interim application filed by the Sri.M.K.R.Advocate seeking release of the golden ornaments at item no.1 to 6 in P.F.No.22/2013 is rejected as per order dated 31.01.2014 observing the order dated 23.03.2013.
24. After going through the entire order sheet it appears that C.W.1 got released the golden ornaments suppressing the order of this court dated 23.03.2013. This conduct of the C.W.1 is nothing but playing fraud on the court.
25. Apart from this, as I have above discussed this court comes to the conclusion that it is just and proper to release the golden ornaments to the persons/finance/shop from whom they are seized, respectively.
26. Now another question which arises for consideration is, is it necessary to initiate action against C.W.1-Smt.Nagarathna for initiating false criminal proceeding against accused no.1 and 2. On this aspect, on careful scrutiny of both the oral and 24 C.C.8629/2013 documentary evidence available on record and after careful appreciation of the circumstances, it is noticed that the evidence of P.W.1/C.W.1-prime witness as to payment of money and as to the alleged cheating by the accused no.1 is absolutely contrary to the case of the prosecution.
As I have above discussed the prosecution failed to prove the financial capacity of the C.W.1 to give money. No material is placed on record to prove that the money is handed over to the accused no.1. Considering all the circumstances, this court comes to the conclusion that the C.W.1-Smt.Nagarathna with intention to gain wrongfully and with intention to harass the accused persons, initiated false criminal proceedings.Under these circumstances, in order to avoid conveyance of wrong message to the public at large, this court feels it proper to initiate necessary legal action as contemplated U/s 250 of Cr.P.C against C.W.1. With these observations, as an answer to point No.2, I proceed to pass the following.....
25 C.C.8629/2013 ORDER Acting U/s.248(1)) of Cr.P.C., I hereby acquit the accused No.1 and 2
for the offences punishable U/secs. 420 and 411 of IPC.
Accused no.1 and 2 are set at liberty forthwith and the bail bond of the accused and that of surety stands canceled.
The seized golden ornaments are ordered to be returned after lapse of appeal period, to the persons/finance/shop from whom they are seized, respectively.
C.W.1-Smt.Nagarathna is directed to produce the golden ornaments which are received for her interim custody before SHO-Girinagar P.S, within 30 days from the date of receipt of intimation.
Office to issue intimation to C.W.1 accordingly.
26 C.C.8629/2013
The SHO of Girinagar P.S. is directed to take steps to secure the golden ornaments from the C.W.1 and return the same to the person/finance/shop from whom they are seized respectively, within 2 months after lapse of appeal period and shall report the same to the Court.
Acting U/Sec. 250 of Cr.P.C, I hereby direct the office to issue notice to C.W.1- Smt.Nagarathna to appear before court and to show cause, as to why further action should not be initiated against her for lodging false complaint, as contemplated U/Sec.250 Cr.P.C returnable by 18.01.2021.
Office is directed to send the copy of this judgment to the SHO of Girinagar P.S for compliance of the directions.
(Judgment dictated to the Stenographer, typed by her computerized copy corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 09th day of November 2020).
(Hattikal Prabhu .S) XXXII Addl.C.M.M. Bangalore.
27 C.C.8629/2013:ANNEXURE:
1.List of Witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:
P.W.1: Smt.Nagarathna
2. List of Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:-
Ex.P.1:- Complaint Ex.P.1(a): Signature Ex.P.2: Mahazar Ex.P.2(a): Signature Ex.P.3 and 4 : two photos of the golden ornaments
3.:- List of witnesses and documents marked on behalf of the accused D.W.1-Rajendra Singh Ex.D.1-Copy of receipt
4. List of Material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:
NIL (Hattikal Prabhu.S) XXXII Addl.C.M.M. Bangalore.