Bangalore District Court
State By Hanumanthanagar P.S vs No.:- 1. Kiran Kumar @ Kirana on 4 December, 2015
1 SC.No.589/2013
IN THE COURT OF THE LIX ADDL.CITY CIVIL
& SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY
Dated this the 4th day of December 2015
PRESENT
************
Sri Deshpande.G.S, B.com. LL.M
LIX ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE CITY
S.C.No.589/2013
Complainant:- State by Hanumanthanagar P.S.
-Vs-
Accused No.:- 1. Kiran Kumar @ Kirana,
S/o Nagaraju,
Aged about 21 years,
R/at No.111, 5th Cross,
Chikkaswamy Layout, Jaraganahalli,
J.P. Nagar 6th Phase,
Bangalore.
2. Anil Kumar @ Ani,
S/o Ramdas,
Aged about 21 years,
R/at No.20, Near Bajan House,
Jaraganahalli, J.P. Nagar post,
Bangalore.
3. Keshava Kumar @ Keshava,
S/o Hanumanthapp,
Aged about 27 yers,
R/at No.64/10, Kanakapura Mai Road,
Banashankari, Bangalore.
2 SC.No.589/2013
4. Deepu,
S/o Keshava Murthy,
Aged about 27 years,
R/at No.117/3, Behind CES School,
Jaraganahalli, J.P. Nagar,
Bangalore.
5. Nagesha,
S/o Bokthappa,
Aged about 22 years,
R/at No.24, 1st Main,
1st Cross, Jaraganahalli,
J.P. Nagar 1st phase,
Bangalore.
6. Smt. Mangala,
W/o Late M. Kumar,
Aged about 25 years,
R/at No.16/1, Kavikeshiraj Road,
Pipeline, Srinagar, Bangalore.
1. Date of Commission : 19.11.2012
of Offence
2. Date of Report :
19.11.2012
of Offence
3. Date of arrest of : Accused Nos.1 to
accused 6 are on bail
4. Name of the : Sri M. Siddappa
complainant
5. Date of :
Commencement 09.07.2014
evidence
6. Date of Closing of :
23.07.2015
Evidence
3 SC.No.589/2013
7. Offences complained of : Sections 143,
144, 147, 148,
302, 120(B) r/w
Sec.149 of IPC
8. Opinion of the Judge : Accused
not found guilty
for the offences
punishable under
Sections 143,
144, 147, 148,
302, 120(B) r/w
Sec.149 of IPC
JUDGMENT
The Police Inspector of Hanumanthanagar police station has filed the charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 6 alleging that, they have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 120-B r/w Sec.149 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that:-
The accused No.6 Smt. Mangala is the wife of deceased M. Kumar. The marriage of sister of accused No.1 Vidya was engaged with CW.6 - Mohan Kumar. However, the performance of said marriage was cancelled 4 SC.No.589/2013 for various reasons. The accused No.1 has started visiting the house of the deceased M. Kumar and has developed illicit intimacy with accused No.6 Mangala. The deceased had informed this fact to his brother P.W.1
- M. Siddappa. He had advised accused No.1 not to visit the house of deceased. Even deceased had requested the accused No.1 not to visit his house often and often. Even then the accused No.1 has continued to visit the house of deceased. The accused Nos.1 and 6 felt that the deceased is coming in the way of their love affair. They have made a conspiracy to eliminate the deceased. They have hired accused Nos.2 to 5 to murder the deceased for Rs.3 Lakhs and paid the advance amount of Rs.60,000/-. On 19.11.2012 the deceased M. Kumar was returning to his house at about 8.30 a.m. in front of Royal Tailor shop, situated at 10th Main Srinagar, Bangalore city on his Honda Activa vehicle after leaving his children in J.S.S. School. At that time, the accused Nos.2 to 5 came in the Esteem car and three accused have assaulted the deceased with choppers and long and caused multiple 5 SC.No.589/2013 grievous injuries and went away from that place in the said car. The said M. Kumar died on the spot. On receipt of information P.W.27 - Police inspector - Venkataswamy has visited the place of incident and has received the report from P.W.1 - M. Siddappa as per Ex.P.1. On the basis of the same, he has registered the case in Crime No.325/2012 and has sent the FIR to the court as per Ex.P46. Thereafter, P.W.27 - P.I. has conducted the spot panchanama/inquest panchanama in the presence of mahazar witnesses in the place of incident as per Ex.P.35 and has seized M.O.s 3 to 6 - chappals, blood sample, blood stained tar from the spot. At that time he has recorded the statements of accused No.6 Mangala, one Shivaraj and Sharadamma. He has sent the dead body to the Victoria hospital for post mortem. During the course of investigation he has arrested the accused and seized the weapons which were used for commission of offence and clothes of the accused and mobile phones and duplicate number plates of the Esteem car by drawing Mahazars in the presence 6 SC.No.589/2013 of mahazar witnesses, on the basis of confessional statements of the accused. He has sent the seized properties to the FSL. He has also recorded the statements of witnesses. After receipt of P.M. Report and FSL Report, by completing investigation formalities, P.W.27 - P.I. has filed the charge sheet against the accused for the above said offences.
3. Accused No.1 to 6 are on bail. Since the above said offences are exclusively triable by Court of Sessions, this case was committed to this court under Sec.209 of Cr.P.C.
4. After appearance of the accused Nos.1 to 6 before this court, charges framed and same are read over and explained to the accused. They pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried. Therefore, the case was posted for prosecution side evidence.
5. The prosecution in support of its case, has examined twenty seven witnesses as P.W.s 1 to 27 and 7 SC.No.589/2013 has got marked sixty eight documents as Ex.P.1 to P.68. Seized properties are marked as M.O.1 to M.O.31. Thereafter, statements of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C recorded. On behalf of the accused, no witnesses examined and no documents marked.
6. Heard the arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor for the state and the learned counsel for the accused.
7. On the basis of the above materials, the following points arise for my consideration:-
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused Nos.1 to 6 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 120-B r/w Sec.149 of IPC?
2. What Order?
8. My findings to the above points are as under:-
POINT No.1 :- In the Negative
POINT No.2:- As per final order,
for the following:-
8 SC.No.589/2013
REASONS
9. Point No. 1 :- The contention of the prosecution in brief is that, the accused No.6 Smt. Mangala is the wife of deceased M. Kumar. The accused No.1 was having illicit intimacy with accused No.6 Mangala and was visiting her house often and often. The deceased M. Kumar has cautioned the accused No.1 not to visit his house. At that time, the accused No.1 had threatened the deceased with dire consequences. The accused Nos.1 and 6 felt that the deceased M. Kumar is coming in the way of their love affair. They have made a conspiracy to eliminate the deceased. They have hired accused Nos.2 to 5 to murder the deceased for Rs.3 Lakhs and paid the advance amount of Rs.60,000/- to them. On 19.11.2012 the deceased M. Kumar was returning to his house at about 8.30 a.m. in front of Royal Tailor shop, situated at 10th Main Srinagar, Bangalore city on his Honda Activa vehicle after leaving his children in J.S.S. School. At that time, the accused Nos.2 to 5 came in the Esteem car and three accused have assaulted the deceased with choppers 9 SC.No.589/2013 and long and caused multiple grievous injuries and committed his murder and went away from that place in the said car and thereby the accused Nos.1 to 6 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 120-B r/w Sec.149 of IPC.
10. The prosecution in order to establish its case has examined twenty seven witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.27. Out of them, P.W.1 - M. Siddappa is the elder brother of the deceased M. Kumar. He is the complainant. He has not supported the case of prosecution. He has been treated as hostile witness and cross examined by the learned Public Prosecutor. He has denied the suggestion of the learned Public Prosecutor that, the accused No.1 was having illicit intimacy with the accused No.6 and was visiting her house often and often. He has also denied the suggestion that, himself and the deceased had warned the accused No.1 not to visit the house of the deceased. He has also denied the suggestion that, the accused Nos.1 and 6 have made a conspiracy to commit the murder of the deceased M. 10 SC.No.589/2013 Kumar and hired accused Nos.2 to 5 to commit the murder of said M. Kumar by paying advance amount of Rs.60,000/- out of the agreed amount of Rs.3 Lakhs. He has also denied the suggestion that, the accused Nos.2 to 5 have committed the murder of M. Kumar in the above said place by assaulting him with choppers and long. He has also denied the suggestion that, he has given the complaint to the jurisdictional police as per Ex.P.1. He has denied the suggestion that, the police have conducted the spot panchanama in his presence as per Ex.P.7.
11. P.W.2 - Narayanappa is the Conductor of B.M.T.C. Bus. He is the eye-witness to the incident. He has not supported the case of prosecution. He has denied the suggestion of the learned Public Prosecutor that, he has seen the incident of assaulting the deceased M. Kumar by accused Nos.2 to 5 with choppers and long on that day. He has denied the suggestion that, he has given the statement before the police in this regard. 11 SC.No.589/2013
12. P.W.3 - lakshman is the relative of the deceased M. Kumar. He has also not supported the case of the prosecution. He has denied the suggestion of learned Public Prosecutor that, the accused No.1 was visiting the house of accused No.6 often and often and he was having illicit intimacy with her. He has denied the suggestion that, the accused have committed the murder of said M. Kumar in this regard. He has denied the suggestion that, he has given the statement before the I.O. in this regard.
13. P.W.4 - Muninanjappa, P.W.5 - Basavaraj, P.W.6 - Narasimhaiah, P.W.7 - C. Mohan, P.W.8 - Siddaraju, P.W.11 - K.K. Ramesh, P.W.12 - Sri Ramu, P.W.13 - Manjunath, P.W.14 - Venkatachala, P.W.15 - Suresh, P.W.16 - Nabiulla Sharieff, P.W.17 - Sham, P.W.18 - Gayaz Ali baig are the mahazar witnesses to the spot panchanama and seizure panchanamas. They have not supported the case of prosecution. They have denied the suggestion of learned Public Prosecutor that, police 12 SC.No.589/2013 have conducted the panchanamas in their presence and seized M.O.s 1 to 31 in their presence.
14. P.W.19 - Doddaiah is the driver. He has not supported the case of the prosecution. He has denied the suggestion that, the accused Deepu had parked the Esteem car near his house and thereafter, the police have seized the same by drawing a mahazar in his presence.
15. P.W.20 - Govindaraju -Head Constable, P.W.21
- Santhosh - P.C., P.W.25 - Rajegowda, P.S.I., P.W.26 - Sudarshan, P.I. deposed about the arrest of the accused.
16. P.W.9 - Y.L. Harish, Asst. Executive Engineer and P.W.10 - K.B. Ramadasappa, Asst. Enginner deposed about preparing the rough sketch Ex.P.17 in the place of incident.
17. P.W.22 - Dixit is the Police constable. He deposed that, he has taken the photographs at the time of conducting panchanama Ex.P.12.
18. P.W.23 - Malathi D. is the Scientific Officer of FSL, Madiwala. She deposed that, she has examined two 13 SC.No.589/2013 chappals, sample blood, blood stained tar, one shirt and one lungi, underwear and banian, sent by the police and found that, the properties Sl.No.1, 2, 5 to 8 were stained with human blood of 'O' group. She has given the report as per Ex.P.40.
19. P.W.24 - K.V. Vijay Kumar is the Head Constable. He deposed that, he has handed over eleven seized properties to the FSL and has obtained acknowledgement for the same.
20. P.W.27 - Venkataswamy, P.I. deposed about the entire investigation of the case.
21. The complainant - P.W.1 and eye - witness P.W.2 and relative of deceased P.W.3 have not supported the case of the prosecution. From the evidence of these witnesses it is not made out that, the accused Nos.1 and 6 are having illicit intimacy and they have made criminal conspiracy to commit the murder of deceased M. Kumar and hired accused Nos.2 to 5 to commit his murder and by paying the amount of Rs.60,000/- as advance and consequently, the accused Nos.2 to 5 have committed his 14 SC.No.589/2013 murder in the above said place by assaulting him with choppers and long.
22. The above mentioned mahazar witnesses have also not supported the case of the prosecution. They deposed that, police have not conducted any mahazars in their presence and seized the properties on the basis of confessional statements of the accused.
23. Remaining witnesses examined are the official witnesses including the police officials.
24. On the basis of the evidence of Investigating Officers - P.W.25 - PSI and P.W.27 - P.I., it cannot be come to the conclusion that, the properties were seized on the basis of confessional statements of the accused. The evidence of Investigating Officers is not corroborated by the evidence of independent mahazar witnesses. Therefore, it is not safe to rely upon the evidence of Investigating Officers. The Hon'ble Supreme court in the decision reported in 1997 SCC (Cri) 1222 Rambilas and others V/s State of MP held that, mere recovery of certain 15 SC.No.589/2013 incriminating articles at the instance of accused cannot form the basis of conviction.
25. From the evidence on record, it is not made out that, the accused have committed the above said offences. The prosecution is not able to prove its case against the accused. Therefore, the accused are entitled for acquittal. Hence, point No.1 is answered in the Negative.
26. POINT No.2:- In view of the above discussions and my finding to Point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER Accused Nos.1 to 6 are not found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 120-B r/w Sec.149 of IPC.
Therefore, they are acquitted for the said offences under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C.
Bail bonds executed by the accused and their sureties stand cancelled.
Seized properties M.O.12 to 15 and 20 mobile phones, M.O.21 to 23 two choppers 16 SC.No.589/2013 and long are valuable properties. They are ordered to be confiscated to the Government after completion of appeal period.
Seized property M.O.31 - cash amount of Rs.13,000/- is confiscated to the Government after completion of appeal period.
Seized properties M.O.1 to 19 and M.O.24 to M.O.30 are worthless. They are ordered to be destroyed after completion of appeal period.
(Dictated to the Judgment-writer directly on computer, typed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 4th day of December 2015).
(DESHPANDE.G.S.) LIX Addl. C.C. & Sessions Judge, BANGALORE CITY.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for prosecution:
PW 1 Siddappa 09.07.2014 PW 2 Narayanappa 09.07.2014 PW.3 Laxmana 09.07.2014 PW.4 M. Muninanjappa 27.10.2014 PW.5 Basavaraj 27.10.2014 17 SC.No.589/2013 PW.6 Narasimhaiah 27.10.2014 PW.7 C. Mohan 19.11.2014 PW.8 Siddaraju 19.11.2014 PW.9 Y.L. Harish 17.03.2015 PW.10 K.B. Ramadasappa 17.03.2015 PW.11 K.K. Ramesh 17.03.2015 PW.12 Ramu 17.03.2015 PW.13 Manjunatha 17.03.2015 PW.14 Venkatachala 17.03.2015 PW.15 Suresh 17.03.2015 PW.16 Nabiulla Shariff 17.03.2015 PW.17 Shyam 15.04.2015 PW.18 Gayaj Ali Baig 15.04.2015 PW.19 Doddaiah 15.04.2015 PW.20 R. Govindaraju 04.06.2015 PW.21 Santhosh M.S. 29.06.2015 PW.22 Dixit S. 29.06.2015 PW.23 Malathi D 23.07.2015 PW.24 K.V. Vijayakumar 23.07.2015 PW.25 B. Rajegowda 23.07.2015 PW.26 P.S. Sudarshan 23.07.2015 PW.27 Venkataswamy 23.07.2015
List of documents marked for prosecution:
Ex. P1 - Complaint Ex.P.1(a) signature of PW.1 18 SC.No.589/2013 Ex.P.1(b) - signature of PW.27 Ex.P.2 - statement of PW.1 Ex.P.3 - restatement of PW.1 Ex.P.4 - statement of PW.2 Ex.P.5 - restatement of PW.2 Ex.P.6 - statement of PW.3 Ex.P.7 - Mahazar Ex.P.7(a) - signature of PW.4 Ex.P.7(b) - Signature of PW.5 Ex.P.7(c) - Signature of PW.25 Ex.P.8 - statement of PW.4 Ex.P.9 - Statement of PW.5 Ex.P.10 - Mahazar Ex.P.10(a) - Signature of PW.6 Ex.P.10(b) - Signature of PW.13 Ex.P.11 - Statement of PW.6 Ex.P.12 - Mahazar Ex.P.12(a) - signature of PW.7 Ex.P.12(b) signature of PW. Ex.P.12(c)- Signature of PW.22 Ex.P.12(d) - Signature of PW.27 Ex.P.13 - Statement of PW.7 Ex.P.14 - Mahazar Ex.P.14(a) - Signature of PW.8 Ex.P.15 - photo Ex.P.16 - statement of PW.8 19 SC.No.589/2013 Ex.P.17 - spot sketch Ex.P.17(a) - signature of PW.10 Ex.P.18 - Letter of PW.9 Ex.P.18(a) - Signature of PW.9 Ex.P.19 - Mahazar Ex.P.19(a) - Signature of PW.11 Ex.P.19(b) - Signature of PW.12 Ex.P.20 - Statement of PW.11 Ex.P.21 - Statement of PW.12 Ex.P.22 - Statement of PW.13 Ex.P.23 - Mahazar Ex.P.23(a) - signature of PW.14 Ex.P.24 - Mahazar Ex.P.24(a) - Signature of PW.14 Ex.P.24(b) - Signature of PW.27 Ex.P.25 - Mahazar Ex.P.25(a) - Signature of PW.14 Ex.P.25(b) - Signature of PW.27 Ex.P.26 - Statement of PW.14 Ex.P.27, 28 - Photos Ex.P.29 - Statement of PW.15 Ex.P.30 - Statement of PW.16 Ex.P.31 - Spot mahazar Ex.P.31(a) - Signature of PW.17 Ex.P.32 - spot mahazar Ex.P.32(a) - Signature of PW.18 20 SC.No.589/2013 Ex.P.33 - Statement of PW.18 Ex.P.34 - statement of p2.19 Ex.P.35 - Inquest mahazar Ex.P.35(a) - Signature of PW.27 Ex.P.36 - Post mortem report Ex.P.37, 38 - photos Ex.P.39 - CD Ex.P.40 - Certificate of examination Ex.P.40(a) - signature of PW.23 Ex.P.41 - sample seal Ex.P.42 - report by PW.25 Ex.P.42(a) - signature of PW.25 Ex.P.43 - Report by PW.25 Ex.P.43(a) - signature of PW.25 Ex.P.44 - Mahazar Ex.P.45 - report by PW.26 Ex.P.46 - FIR Ex.P.46(a) - Signature of PW.27 Ex.P.47 - report by PW.27 Ex.P.48 - accused statement Ex.P.49 - accused statement Ex.P.50 - accused statement Ex.P.51 - mahazar Ex.P.51(a) - signature Ex.P.52 - mahazar Ex.P.52(a) - signature 21 SC.No.589/2013 Ex.P.53 - Mahazar Ex.P.53(a) signature Ex.P.54 - Mahazar Ex.P.54(a) 0 signature Ex.P.55 - call details Ex.P.56 - call details Ex.P.57 - Registration particulars Ex.P.58 to 68 - Photos MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED:-
M.O.1 - Vehicle plate M.O.2 - vehicle number plate M.O.3 - one chappal M.O.4 - one chappal M.O.5 - blood M.O.6 - sample tar M.O.7 - one shirt M.O.8 - one lungi M.O.9 - one underwear M.O.10 - one banian M.O.11 - one Nokia set mobile phone (black) M.O.12 - one Nokia mobile phone M.O.13 - LG Nokia mobile phone M.O.14 - white mobile phone M.O.15 - Samsung mobile set M.O.16 - blood stained white checks shirt 22 SC.No.589/2013 M.O.17 - blue checks lungi M.O.18 - one brown underwear M.O.19 - blood stained Santo Baniyan M.O.20 - one mobile phone M.O.21,22 - 2 choppers M.O.23 - one long M.O.24,25 - two blood stained clothes M.O.26 - red shirt M.O.27 - jeans pant M.O.28 - T-shirt M.O.29 - P.F.220/12(white and yellow checks Full arm shirt) M.O.30 - track pant M.O.31 - currency notes (total Rs.13,000/-) List of witnesses examined for defence: - NIL List of documents marked for defence:- NIL (DESHPANDE.G.S.) LIX Addl. C.C. & Sessions Judge, BANGALORE CITY.23 SC.No.589/2013
Judgment pronounced in the open court (vide separate judgment) with the following operative portion:
Accused Nos.1 to 6 are not found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 120-B r/w Sec.149 of IPC.
Therefore, they are acquitted for the said offences under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C.
Bail bonds executed by the accused and their sureties stand cancelled.
Seized properties M.O.12 to 15 and 20 mobile phones, M.O.21 to 23 two choppers and long are valuable properties. They are 24 SC.No.589/2013 ordered to be confiscated to the Government after completion of appeal period.
Seized property M.O.31 - cash amount of Rs.13,000/- is confiscated to the Government after completion of appeal period.
(DESHPANDE.G.S.) LIX Addl. C.C. & Sessions Judge, BANGALORE CITY.