Bangalore District Court
State Of Karnataka vs Ansar on 30 January, 2020
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2020
PRESENT : SRI SHIVASHANKAR B. AMARANNAVAR, B.Com. LL.M.,
Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
S.C. No. 66/2016
COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY SUDDAGUNTEPALYA POLICE
STATION,
BENGALURU.
Vs.
ACCUSED : 1. ANSAR
S/O. SARDAR,
AGED 29 YEARS,
R/AT. 2ND CROSS,
IN FRONT OF URDU SCHOOL,
OLD GURAPPANA PALYA,
BENGALURU - 29.
2. NICOLAS
S/O. MADI,
AGED 27 YEARS,
R/AT. NO.204, 1ST MAIN,
NEAR POLICE QUARTERS,
MALINGESHWAR LAYOUT,
BENGALURU - 30.
3. PANDIYAN
S/O. MANOHAR,
AGED 23 YEARS,
R/AT. NO.48, 2ND MAIN,
2ND CROSS, MARUTHI NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 68.
SC. No.66/2016
2
4. JILAN ALI
S/O. SYED BABU,
AGED 21 YEARS,
R/AT.NO.12/1,
SHAHNAZ MANZIL,
BEHIND THE HOUSE OF
S.P. RAMANNA, 9TH CROSS,
R.T. NAGAR MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU - 32.
5. JIA @ BAIL JIA
R/AT GURAPPANAPALYA
BENGALURU - 32.
(Case against A-5 is split up)
Date of offence 15.06.2015
Date of report of offence 15.06.2015
Date of arrest of accused 15.06.2015 (A1 to A4)
Date of release on bail 25.11.2015 (A1)
25.06.2015 (A2 & A3)
A4 in JC
Total period of custody 05 months 10 days (A1)
10 Days (A2 & A3)
04 Yrs. 10 Mons & 15 days
(A4)
Name of the complainant Nanjegowda S
Date of commencement of 17.06.2019
recording of evidence
Date of closing of evidence 24.01.2020
Offence complained of 399, 402 of IPC.
Opinion of the Judge Accused found not guilty
SC. No.66/2016
3
State represented by Learned Public Prosecutor
Accused defended by Sri. R.N., Adv. For A-1
Sri. K.P.N., Adv. For A-2 & 3
Sri. B.A.S., Adv. For A-4
JUDGMENT
This is a charge-sheet submitted by the Sub-Inspector of Police of Mico Layout Police Station, Bengaluru City against the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of IPC.
2) The case of the prosecution in brief is as under:
On 5.6.2015 at about 8.00 p.m. inside the Tavarakere Park at Bismillah Nagar, BTM Layout I Stage, Bannerughatta Road within the limits of the Mico Layout Police Station, Bengaluru, the accused Nos.1 to 4 along with the accused No.5 had assembled at the aforesaid place having deadly weapons and had prepared for committing the offence of dacoity. On receiving the credible information, CW-1 secured the panchas, came to the spot and arrested the accused persons. The accused No.5 fled away from the scene of offence. Thereafter, CW-1 lodged the complaint and a case came to be registered for the offence punishable under Sections 399, 402 of IPC. Subsequently, the investigation was set into motion and after completion of the investigation the charge-sheet was filed against the accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offences SC. No.66/2016 4 punishable under Sections 399, 402 of IPC. The accused No.5 has absconded and the case against him is split up.
3) The accused faced the trial and they were defended by their Counsel and after hearing, my learned predecessor has framed the charge for the offence punishable under Sections 399, 402 of IPC, wherein the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and thereafter the prosecution has examined the witnesses PWs.1 to 3 and has got marked Exs.P.1 to P3 and also got marked material objects MO-1 to MO-5 and thereafter the statement u/Section 313 of Cr.P.C., was recorded wherein the accused denied the evidence appearing against them.
The accused did not choose to lead any defence evidence.
4) Heard the arguments.
5) The points for my consideration are;
Point No.1: Whether the Prosecution has proved that on 5.6.2015 at about 8.00 p.m. inside the Tavarakere Park at Bismillah Nagar, BTM Layout I Stage, Bannerughatta Road within the limits of the Mico Layout Police Station, Bengaluru, the accused Nos.1 to 4 along with the accused No.5 having possessed the deadly weapons had prepared for committing the dacoity and SC. No.66/2016 5 thus committed offence U/section 399 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt??
Point No.2: Whether the Prosecution has further proved that the accused Nos.1 to 4 along with the accused No.5 had assembled at the aforesaid place having deadly weapons for the purpose of the commission of the dacoity and thus committed offence U/section 402 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt?
Point No.3: What Order?
6) My answer to the above points is;
Point No.1 : In the Negative.
Point No.2 : In the Negative.
Point No.3 : As per the final order, for the following;
REASONS
7) Point Nos.1 and 2: These two points are taken together in order to avoid repetition. It is the case of the prosecution that, on 5.6.2015 at about 8.00 p.m., the accused Nos.1 to 5 had assembled inside Tavarekere park at Bismila Nagar, BTM Layout 1 st Stage, Bannerghatta SC. No.66/2016 6 road, Bangalore, having deadly weapons preparing to commit dacoity and committed offence punishable under Sections 399 and 402 IPC. PW.1 is the Police Head Constable Shivakumar, who accompanied PW.3 PSI for the raid. PW.2 is the PSI, who received report from PW.3 as per Ex.P1 and also received Mahazar Ex.P3 and registered the case and conducted investigation and filed charge sheet. PW.3 is the PSI, who received credible information and he secured CW.2 and 3 panchas and went along with his staff PW.1, CW.4 to 6 and 8 to Tavarekere Park and surrounded the accused Nos.1 to 5 and caught hold accused Nos.1 to 4, seized weapons, which they were holding under Mahazar Ex.P3 and filed report as per Ex.P1 and produced the accused Nos.1 to 4 before PW.1. CW.2 and 3 are the Panchas and the prosecution has failed to secure them and failed to examine the said CW.2 and 3 panchas in spite of giving sufficient opportunity to secure them. The prosecution has not chosen to examine CW.4 to 6 and 8, who accompanied PW.1 and 3 to the raid.
8) PW.1 has deposed that, he is a Head Constable in Mico Layout P.S., and on 15.6.2015 at about 8.15 p.m., PW-3 called him and CW.4 to 6 and 8 and told that he has received credible information that some five persons were sitting in Tavarekere park and Bismilla Nagar and they were holding deadly weapons and preparing to commit dacoity. He has further deposed that PW.3 secured CW.2 and 3 as panchas and informed them about the credible SC. No.66/2016 7 information received by him and they all went to Tavarekere park at about 8.35 p.m. and PW.3 has sent CW.4 and 8 to ascertain regarding the credible information received and to give signal. He has further deposed that CW.4 and 8 went there and got confirmed the credible information and gave signal and they all surrounded the said five persons, who were present there and caught hold four persons and one person escaped and ran away. He has further deposed that PW.3 and CW.5 caught hold accused No.2 Nicolas and he was holding knife. He has further deposed that he caught hold accused No.3 Pandian, who was holding a wooden club. He has further deposed that CW.4 and CW.6 caught hold accused No.4 Jilan Ali and he was possessing chilly powder. He has further deposed that accused Nos.1 to 4 on enquiry told that the name of the person who ran away is Jia @ Bail. He has further deposed that Jia @ Bail Jia ran away by throwing the wooden club, which he was holding. He has further deposed that PW.3 prepared mahazar in the presence of CW.2 and 3 between 8.45 p.m. and 10.00 p.m., and seized the weapons which accused Nos.1 to 4 were holding and which had been thrown by Zia @ Bail Zia and thereafter they along with accused Nos.1 to 4 and seized weapons came to police station and PW.3 filed a complaint before PW.2 and produced accused Nos.1 to 4 and weapons seized. He has further deposed that accused No.1 was hold chopper MO.1, accused No.2 was holding knife MO.2 and accused Nos.3 and 5 were holding two clubs MOs.3 and 4. In the cross-
SC. No.66/2016 8 examination, PW.1 has stated that he has not produced any document to show that he was on duty on 15.6.2015. He has admitted the suggestion that choppers similar to MO.1 are available in the houses. He has denied the suggestion that a false case has been filed against accused for the purpose of statistics. He has stated that he do not know the timings of opening and closing of the Tavarekere park. He has denied the suggestion that the incident has not taken place on 15.6.2015 as deposed by him. He has stated that they did not search themselves on that day. He has stated that his signature has not been taken on the Mahazar. He has denied the suggestion that he was not present at the time of alleged incident. The Mahazar is at Ex.P3. Ex.P3 does not bear the signature of PW.1. If PW.1 was present at the time of preparing Ex.P3 Mahazar, he ought to have affixed his signature on the said Mahazar. Therefore, the presence of PW.1 at the time of raid and securing accused Nos.1 to 4 and seizing Mos.1 to 5 is doubtful.
9) PW.2 is the PSI and he has deposed that on 15.6.2015 at about 10.25 p.m., when he was on SHO duty, PW.3 Nanjegowda, PSI came and filed a report and produced accused Nos.1 to 4, Seizure Mahazar and properties and he received the said report and registered in Crime No.550/2015 for offence punishable under Sections 399, 402 of IPC and sent FIR to the jurisdictional court. He has further stated that he enquired accused SC. No.66/2016 9 Nos.1 to 4 and recorded their voluntary statement and on the same day he recorded the statements of CW.2 and 3 and after completing investigation filed charge sheet against the accused Nos.1 to 4 for offence punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of IPC on 27.7.2015. In the cross-examination, he has stated that he has not produced any document to show that he was on SHO duty on 15.6.2015. He has further stated that the properties similar to MOs.1 to 5 are available in market. He has denied that he has created EX.P3 Mahazar in the police station. The evidence of PW.2 only goes to establish that he received the report filed by PW.3 as per Ex.P1 and registered FIR as per Ex.P2 and received Seizure Mahazar Ex.P3 and produced accused Nos.1 to 4 before the jurisdictional Magistrate and filed charge sheet against the accused.
10) PW.3 is the PSI, S.Nanjegowda and he has deposed that he was in Mico Layout police station and on 15.6.2015, when he was in police station at about 8.00 p.m., he received credible information from the informant that some five persons were sitting in Tavarekere park at Bismilla Nagar and they were holding deadly weapons and preparing to commit dacoity. He has further deposed that he secured CW.2 and 3 as Panchas and intimated PW.1, CW.4 to 6 and 8 and asked them to accompany him and intimated the credible information to Panchas. He has further deposed that they all went in Hoysala Jeep near SC. No.66/2016 10 Tavarekere Park at about 8.35 p.m. and he sent CW.4 and 8 along with panchas to ascertain regarding the credible information received. CW.4 and 8 and panchas went there and got confirmed the credible information and came back and told the same to him. He has further deposed that they all went there and surrounded five persons and caught hold four persons and one person escaped and ran away. He has deposed that he and CW.5 caught hold accused No.1 Ansar and he was holding chopper, CW.8 caught hold accused No.2 Nicolas and he was holding knife, CW.7 caught hold accused No.3 Pandian and he was holding wooden club, CW.4 and 6 caught hold accused No.4 Jilan Ali and he was possessing chilly powder packet in his pocket. He has further deposed that accused Nos.1 to 4 on enquiry told him that the name of the person who ran away is Zia @ Bail Zia. He has further deposed that the said Zia @ Bail Zia ran away by throwing the wooden club, which he was holding. He has further deposed that he prepared Mahazar in the presence of CW.2 and 3 between 8.45 p.m. and 10.00 p.m. and seized weapons which accused Nos.1 to 4 were holding and the weapon thrown by Zia @ Bail Zia and prepared Mahazar as per Ex.P3 in the presence of Panchas CW.2 and 3. He has further deposed that thereafter they all came along with accused Nos.1 to 4 and seized weapons to the police station and he filed complaint before PW.2 PSI as per Ex.P1 and handed over the weapons and accused Nos.1 to 4 before PW.2. In the cross-examination, PW.3 has denied the suggestion that the area near Tavarekere park is SC. No.66/2016 11 a busy area and people will move around till 10.00 p.m. He has denied the suggestion that on four sides of the said Tavarekere park there are residential buildings. He has stated that he has not given notice in writing to CW.2 and 3 panchas. He has denied the suggestion that he has not secured CW.2 and 3. He has denied the suggestion that he prepared Ex.P3 Mahazar in the police station. He has denied the suggestion that he has filed a false case for the purpose of statistics.
11) CW.2 is one R.Raveendra and CW.3 is one Vijay. CW.2 and 3 are stated to be panchas to Ex.P3 Seizure Mahazar. According to the prosecution case, CW.2 and 3 accompanied PW.1, PW.3 and CW.4 to 6 and 8 for the raid and the police surrounded and caught hold accused Nos.1 to 4 and seized MOs.1 to 5. The said CW.2 and 3 are independent witnesses, who are panchas to Ex.P3 Mahazar. The prosecution has failed to secure CW.2 and CW.3 and examine them, who are independent witnesses to the case of prosecution. The presence of PW.1 at the time of incident is doubtful as he has not affixed his signature at Ex.P3 Mahazar. CW.2 and 3, who are independent Panchas to Ex.P3 Mahazar have not been examined. Therefore, a doubt arises regarding the case of the prosecution. Therefore, the benefit of doubt has to be extended to the accused. Therefore, I hold that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable SC. No.66/2016 12 doubt. Accordingly, I answer point Nos.1 and 2 in the Negative.
12) Point No.3: For the aforesaid reasons, I pass the following;
ORDER The accused Nos.1 to 4 are hereby acquitted under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C., for the offence punishable under Section 399 and 402 of IPC.
Their bail bonds shall stand cancelled.
MOs. 3 to 5 are worthless and ordered to be destroyed after the appeal period is over and if the appeal is filed after disposal of the appeal.
MO-1 and 2 Chopper and Knife respectively, shall be confiscated to the State after the appeal period is over and if the appeal is filed after disposal of the appeal. (Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed and computerized by him, the same is corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 30th day of January, 2020).
(SHIVASHANKAR B. AMARANNAVAR) Principal City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
SC. No.66/2016
13
ANNEXURE
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE
PROSECUTION:
PW.1 : Shivakumar, HC. 5372
PW.2 : Neelakantha M, PSI
PW.3 : S.Nanjegowda, PSI
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE DEFENCE:
NIL LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITTED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P1 : Complaint Ex.P1(a): Signature of CW.1 on Ex.P1 Ex.P1(b): Endorsement of PW.2 Ex.P2 : FIR Ex.P2(a): Signature of PW.2 Ex.P3 : Mahazar Ex.P3(a): Signature of PW.2 Ex.P3(b): Signature of PW.3 Ex.P3(c): Signature of Mahazar witness Ex.P3(d): Signature of Mahazar witness LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITTED ON BEHALF OF DEFENCE:
NIL SC. No.66/2016 14 LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:
MO-1: Chopper MO-2: Knife MO-3 & 4: Two Clubs MO-5: One pocket containing chilly powder.
Principal City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
*sk