Bangalore District Court
Came To Station And Lodged Complaint ... vs Took Them To Bangarapete on 22 October, 2018
IN THE COURT OF THE VII ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
Dated this the 22nd day of October 2018
Present: Sri. Laxman R. Kurane, B.Com., LL.B (Spl).,
VII ADDL. C.M.M., Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT U/S. 355 OF Cr.P.C.:
1. CC NO. : 11852/2016
2. Date of offence : 30.9.2014
3. Complainant : State by Subramanyanagara Police Station
4. Accused : 1. Parimala - SPLIT UP.
2. Vijayakumar - SPLIT UP.
3. B.Selvakumar
S/o late K. Balasundaram,
38 years, r/at No. 158,
In front of Police Quarters,
J.B.Kaval, Nandini Layout,
Bangalore.
5. Offences complained of : Sec. 420 r/w 34 IPC and Sec. 76 of
Chit Fund Act, 1982
6. Plea : Accused pleaded not guilty
7. Final order : Acting U/s. 248 (1) Accused No.3 is
acquitted
2
The PSI of Subramanyanagara Police Station has filed the final
report as against the accused person for the offence punishable under Sec.
420 r/w 34 IPC and Sec. 76 of Chit Fund Act, 1982.
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution is that C.W.1 to 11
put chit amount of Rs 10,000/- with accused persons at No. 3888, 10 th
cross, Gayathrinagara, Bangalore, and the accused persons have collected
Rs 23,40,000/- from C.W.1 to 11 and without paying their chit amount
accused persons have cheated C.W.1 to 11 and thereby committed the
aforesaid offences.
3. The accused No.3 appeared through his counsel and was enlarged
on bail. As accused No.1 and 2 remained absconding, case against them is
split up and registered separate case. Prosecution papers are furnished to
the accused person in compliance of 207 of Cr.P.C and after hearing before
charge, since no grounds were made out for his discharge, charges were
framed, read over to the accused person in the language known to him.
The accused person having understood the same, denied it to be false and
claimed to be tried. As such, the matter was set down for trial.
3
4. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused person
had cited C.W.1 to 15 as its charge sheet witnesses, among whom C.W.1, 2,
13, 4, 9, 15 and 4 are examined as P.W.1 to 7 and got marked Ex.P.1 to P.4.
The accused was questioned under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. for the
incriminating material available in the case of the prosecution. He denied
the same and not chosen to adduce evidence on his behalf. As such, the
matter was posted for arguments.
5. Heard the learned Sr. APP for the prosecution and the learned
counsel for the accused person. Perused the materials available on record.
6. Following points arise for my consideration:
(1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that
the accused person has committed the offence punishable
under Sec. 420 r/w 34 IPC and Sec. 76 of Chit Fund Act,
1982?
(2) What order ?
7. Having regard to the arguments heard and the materials placed on
record, my answer to the above points are :
Point No.1 : In the negative.
Point No.2 : See final order, for the following :
REASONS
Point No.1 :
4
8. P.W.1, 2, 4, and 5 Dinesha, Lakshmi, Usha and Manjula have
stated in their evidence that they have put chit run by the accused No.1 and
2 but after completion of chit period, the accused No.1 and 2 have not paid
their chit amount. Hence, P.W.1 has lodged complaint and remaining
witnesses have given statement before the Police.
9. P.W.3 Ashok Kumar is the witness to the mahazar has stated in his
evidence that about 2 years back at 3.30 p.m. Subramanyanagara Police
came near the house of accused No.1 and drew mahazar Ex.P.2 and he
signed the same as Ex.P.2 (a).
10. P.W.6 Harsha, P.I. has stated in his evidence that on 27.6.2015
complainant came to station and lodged complaint Ex.P.1 which he
registered in Crime No. 143/2015 and drew mahazar Ex.P.2 in presence of
C.W.12, 13 and C.W.1 and on 27.6.2015 C.W.14 produced accused No.3
before station and he recorded voluntary statement of accused and the
accused took them to Bangarapete, Robertsonpete, Marikuppa, recorded
statement of C.W.2 to 11 and after completing investigation filed the charge
sheet.
5
11. P.W.7 Thimmachari, HC has stated in his evidence that on
27.6.2015 himself and C.W.15 came to the house of accused No.3 and
caught him and produced before C.W.15 at 2.10 p.m. and given statement.
12. Except the evidence of these seven witnesses, the prosecution has
not examined any witnesses. Except the oral evidence of witnesses that
they have put chit with the accused persons, they have not produced any
documentary evidence to prove the same. P.W.6 and 7 are police
witnesses have stated about investigation of the case. There is no evidence
against the accused persons that they have cheated P.W.1, 2, 4 & 5.
Without documentary evidence, it is difficult to believe that the accused
persons have cheated P.W.1, 2, 4 and 5. Hence, the prosecution has failed
to prove the guilt of the accused person beyond all reasonable doubt.
Accordingly, I answer the above point in the negative.
Point No. 2 :
13. In view of the reasons stated at point No.1, I proceed to pass the
following:
ORDER
Invoking the jurisdiction vested to this Court under Sec. 248(1) of the Criminal 6 Procedure code, the accused No.3 is acquitted of the offence punishable U/s. 420 r/w 34 IPC and Sec. 76 of Chit Fund Act, 1982.
Bail bond and surety bond executed by the accused No.3 and his surety shall be in force for the period of 6 months.
Case papers shall be preserved for trial against split up accused persons.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript thereof is computerized and print out taken by him is verified, corrected & then pronounced by me in the Open Court dated this the 22nd day of October 2018) (LAXMAN R. KURANE), VII ACMM, BENGALURU.
ANNEXURES:
List of witnesses examined on behalf of the Prosecution:
P.W.1 : Dinesha P.W.2 : Lakshmi Sadananda P.W.3 : Ashokkumar P.W.4 : Usha P.W.5 : Manjula P.W.6 : Sriharsha P.W.7 : Thimmachari
List of documents marked on behalf of the Prosecution:
Ex.P.1 : Complaint
Ex.P.2 : Spot mahazar
7
Ex.P.3 : Cheque
Ex.P.4 : F.I.R.
List of Material Objects marked on behalf of the Prosecution:
Nil For defence: - NIL -
VII ACMM, BENGALURU.8
Judgment is pronounced in open court.
Invoking the jurisdiction vested to this Court under Sec. 248(1) of the Criminal Procedure code, the accused No.3 is acquitted of the offence punishable U/s. 420 r/w 34 IPC and Sec. 76 of Chit Fund Act, 1982.
Bail bond and surety bond executed by the accused No.3 and his surety shall be in force for the period of 6 months.
Case papers shall be preserved for trial against split up accused persons.
VII ACMM, BENGALURU.
9 1 0