Bangalore District Court
Sunitha Sharma vs Chandra Shekar on 13 December, 2024
KABC030045182019
Presented on : 19.01.2019
Registered on : 19.01.2019
Decided on : 13.12.2024
Duration : 05y/10m/24days
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 13th day of December 2024
C.C.No.1492/2019
COMPLAINANT : The State by
Cubbon Park Police Station
-V/s-
ACCUSED : Chandrashekar
S/o. Tirumalappa, Aged 26 years,
R/at. No.54,Mallasandra,
Jalahalli, 2nd Cross, Bengaluru.
P/R/at. Thuggihalli Puravara
Hobli, Madhugiri Taluk,Tumkur.
Date of Commission of 18.06.2018
offence
Date of report 19.06.2018
Date of arrest 20.06.2018
Name of the complainant Sunitha Sharma
2 C.C.No.1492/2019
Date of commencement of 19.02.2020
recording Evidence
Date of closing evidence 29.11.2024
Offences complained of U/Sec.354[D], 506 of IPC
Opinion of the Judge As per final orders
State Represented by Senior Asst. Public Prosecutor
Accused Represented by Sri. K.N. Chandrashekar Reddy.,
Advocate.
JUDGMENT
[Delivered on 13.12.2024] The Police Sub-Inspector of Cubbon Park Police Station has filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/Sec. 354[D], 506 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of prosecution case is as follows:
On 19.06.2018 at 11 a.m., the accused stalked CW.1 when she was proceeding in her car near Siddalingaiah Circle on Kasturba Road, captured her photographs and when CW.1 questioned him, the accused threatened her to kill. On the basis of written information given by the CW.1, the Cubbon Park Police have registered this case in Cr.No.121/2018.3 C.C.No.1492/2019
3. On 20.06.2018, the police arrested the accused and produced him before the Court. As per order dated: 22.06.2018, he was enlarged on bail.
4. After the investigation, the IO filed charge sheet against the accused. This Court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable U/Sec. 354[D], 506 of IPC. This Court complied with Sec.207 of Cr.P.C and furnished charge sheet copy to the accused.
5. This Court heard both the parties. As there were no grounds to discharge the accused, this Court framed charges for the offences punishable U/Sec. 354[D], 506 of IPC. The accused did not plead guilty. He claimed to be tried.
6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined three witnesses as PW.1 to 3 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 6 documents and MO.1. After the completion of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused was recorded U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C., wherein he denied the incriminating evidence led against them. He did not choose to lead his defense evidence. 4 C.C.No.1492/2019
7. I have heard the arguments of Senior APP and Sri.KNCR Advocate.
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 stalked CW.1 on 19.06.2018 at 11 a.m., when she was proceeding in her car near Siddalingaiah Circle on Kasturba Road, captured her photographs and thereby he has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.354[D] of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the aforementioned date, time and place, the accused threatened CW.1 to kill, when she questioned his acts and thereby he has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.506 of IPC?
3. What order?
9. My answers to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In Negative
Point No.2 : In Negative
5 C.C.No.1492/2019
Point No.3 : As per final orders for the following:
REASONS
Point No.1 & 2: As all these points are interrelated, I take both the points together for common discussion to avoid repetition.
10. The burden is casted on the prosecution to prove that, the accused stalked CW.1 on 19.06.2018 at 11 a.m., when she was proceeding in her car near Siddalingaiah Circle on Kasturba Road, captured her photographs and threatened her to kill, when she questioned his acts. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined the police officer, who arrested the accused/ CW.8 as PW.1, mahazar witness/CW.7 as PW.2 and investigating officer/CW.10 as PW.3 and got marked report given by pW.1 as Ex.P.1, spot mahazer as Ex.P.2, seizure mahazer as Ex.P.3, portion of the statement of PW.2 as Ex.P.4, written information/complaint as Ex.P.5, FIR as Ex.P.6 and Samsung mobile as MO.1.
11. CW.8/PW.1- Ravindra.M., in his evidence has stated that, while he was working as Head constable at Cubbon park police station on 19.06.2018 he was doing patrolling duty along with 6 C.C.No.1492/2019 Sacchidananda. The CW.10 called him to the station and asked them to bring the accused from the office of police commissioner, who was stalking CW.1. Accordingly, they visited the office of Police Commissioner and met CW.1, who told that the accused stalked her and threatened her with dire consequences. On enquiry, the accused told his name Chandrashekar S/o. Thirumalappa. They noticed the photographs of CW.1 captured by the accused in his mobile phone. Hence, they took him to their custody and produced him before CW.10. He has given Ex.P.1 report in this regard. He has identified the accused. He can identify the mobile which was in possession of the accused.
12. CW.7/PW.2 -Shafiulla, in his evidence has stated that, he is not acquainted with the accused. He does not know anything about this case. Ex.P.2 and 3 mahazers bear his signatures. About 5 years ago, he signed those documents in the police station. He is not aware of the contents of the same. The police neither taken 7 C.C.No.1492/2019 him to any place nor drawn any mahazer nor seized any articles in his presence.
13. CW.10/PW.3 -Amaresh, in his evidence has stated that, while he was working as PSI at Cubbon Park police station on 19.06.2018 at 2.30 p.m., the CW.1 came to their station and gave Ex.P.5 complaint, on the basis of which, he registered Ex.P.6 -FIR. He learnt that, the CW.2 and 3 caught hold of the accused, who stalked CW.1 and produced him at the office of police commissioner. Accordingly, he sent CW.8 and Sacchidananda to bring him to the station. Accordingly, his staff produced the accused by name Chandrashekar at 3 p.m. In this regard, the PW.1 gave Ex.P.1 report. On the same day at 3 p.m., he visited the spot which was showed by CW.1 and drawn Ex.P.2 mahazar till 4.15 p.m., in the presence of CW.6 and PW.2. Subsequently, he recorded the statements of CW.2 to 5, PW.1 and Sacchidanada. He enquired the accused and followed arrest procedure. The accused produced MO.1 Samsung mobile phone in which, he 8 C.C.No.1492/2019 captured the photographs of CW.1. Hence, he seized the said mobile by drawing Ex.P.3 mahazar in between 6 p.m., to 6.45 p.m., Subsequently, he recorded the statements of CW.6 and PW.2. On 20.06.2018, he produced the accused before the court. He has identified the accused. On 12.07.2018, he recorded the restatement of CW.1. On 13.07.2018, he produced the CW.1 before 24th ACMM to record her statement U/Sec.164 of Cr.P.C. By completing the investigation, he filed the charge sheet against the accused.
14. On the basis of Ex.P.5-written information given by CW.1, the Cubbon Park police have registered this case, investigated the matter and filed charge sheet against the accused. Ex.P.5 written information is given under the caption of 'complaint against perfect detective agency people'. In Ex.P.5, the CW.1 had alleged that, she had given complaint against Narotham Sharma @ Premkumar, which was registered as Cr.No.110/2018. When she was returning back by dropping the victim to the hostel, the 9 C.C.No.1492/2019 accused came with four persons and threatened her to withdraw the case. Another person threatened her by showing knife. On 19.06.2018 at 11 a.m., they followed her, took her pictures and made video. When she shouted for help, public caught hold of 2 persons and others ran away. They were handed over to Commissioner of police. Accordingly, she requested the police to take necessary action against them.
15. In order to ascertain the correctness of the allegations made in Ex.P.5, this Court had issued repeated summons, non-bailable warrants and proclamation against CW.1 to 6. Inspite of it, the prosecution has not secured their presence. By noting the absence of the witnesses and age of the case, this Court dropped them from examination. Hence, in the present case neither the victim nor the eye witnesses appeared before the Court to explain, why the accused was taken to the office of police commissioner on 19.06.2018.
10 C.C.No.1492/2019
16. Though the prosecution contends that, the accused captured the photos and made video of CW.1 by stalking her on 19.06.2018, the PW.3 being the IO did not send MO.1 mobile to FSL to ascertain the correctness of the allegations made by the complainant in Ex.P.5. The PW.3 did not say that, he has seen the photos and videos of CW.1 in MO.1 mobile, while seizing it.
17. As per PF No.66/2018, the IO seized display damaged/broken Black colored Samsung mobile from the accused. The IO did not say that MO.1 was in working condition, when he seized the same. Though the PW.1 contends that, the PW.3 deputed him and Sacchidananda to bring the accused from the office of Police Commissioner on 19.06.2018, the so-called Sacchidananda is arrayed as witness to this case.
18. The PW.1 in his evidence has stated that, they found the photographs of CW.1 captured by the accused in his mobile phone. But, neither the PW.1 nor Sacchidananda were asked to check the mobile of the accused. This fact has been admitted by 11 C.C.No.1492/2019 PW.1 in his cross examination. The IO did not say that, MO.1 was in working condition. When, the IO has seized display broken/damaged phone, how the PW.1 can see the photos of videos captured therein?
19. PW.2 being the signatory to Ex.P.2 -spot mahazer and Ex.P.3-seizure mahazer denied that, the police had taken him to the spot and drawn mahazer in his presence. He too denied that, the police have seized display-damaged Samsung mobile phone i.e., MO.1 from the accused in his presence.
20. During the course of cross examination, the PW.3 admitted that, the accused had engaged the accused from housekeeping department to look after her mother/Susheela Sharma. He too admits that the CW.1 had lodged many cases against her mother. He too admits that, Smt. Susheela Sharma had lodged many cases against her daughter/CW.1 for the tortures given by her.
21. He too admits that, a case was registered against CW.1 on the allegation that, she had abducted her mother with the 12 C.C.No.1492/2019 assistance of CW.2 to 7. The PW.3 admits that, the CW.1 got registered a rape case against Narotham Kumar, after obtaining bail from the Court as, the kidnap case was registered by Narotham Kumar. But, he pleaded ignorance when he was suggested that, it was registered as a revenge towards Narotham Kumar.
22. If we read the oral evidence of PW.3 in comparison with the contents of Ex.P.5, it appears that, the CW.1 is acquainted with the accused as he was the care taker of her mother and she is in the habit of lodging cases one after the other. There is no cogent evidence on record to hold that, MO.1 belongs to the accused and it was seized from the accused by drawing Ex.P.3 mahazer. No pancha witnesses stated before the Court that, he/she has seen the police seizing MO.1 mobile from the accused in their presence by drawing Ex.P.3.
23. There is no cogent evidence on record to hold that, the photos and videos of CW.1 were captured or recorded in MO.1. 13 C.C.No.1492/2019 Moreover, MO.1 has not been sent to FSL or technical expert to confirm that, it consists of photos and videos of CW.1. No eye witnesses appeared before the Court to say that, they have seen the accused stalking CW.1. The CW.2 and 3 did not appear before the Court to say that, they caught hold of the accused and produced him before the Commissioner of police.
24. From the evidence led by the prosecution witnesses, the allegations made against the accused are not proved. The oral evidence led by PW.1 to 3 is not helpful to the case of the prosecution. Their evidence is no way 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.
25. Thus, the prosecution has failed to prove that, the accused stalked CW.1 on 19.06.2018 at 11 a.m., when she was proceeding in her car near Siddalingaiah Circle on Kasturba Road, captured her photographs and threatened her to kill, when she questioned 14 C.C.No.1492/2019 his acts. In such circumstances, I answer point No.1 and 2 in Negative.
Point No.3: For the aforesaid reasons I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER By exercising the powers conferred U/Sec.248[1] of Cr.P.C., the accused is acquitted from the charges of Sec. 354[D], 506 of IPC.
The bail bonds executed by the accused stands cancelled.
The bonds executed by the accused U/Sec.437[A] of Cr.P.C., will be in force till the completion of the appeal period.
The property seized under
PF.No.66/2018 [P.R.No.44/2024] MO.1
display broken Samsung mobile phone being worthless is ordered to be destroyed after the appeal period.
TATTANDA Digitally signed by TATTANDA
DAMAYANTI SOMAIAH
DAMAYANTI Date: 2024.12.13 17:46:16
SOMAIAH +0530
13.12.2024 [TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA]
XLI A.C.J.M., BENGALURU
15 C.C.No.1492/2019
ANNEXURE
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PROSECUTION:
PW.1 : Ravindra M PW.2 : Shafi Ulla PW.3 : Amaresh
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 : Report given by PW.1 Ex.P.1[a] : Signature of PW.1 Ex.P.1[b] : Signature of PW.2 Ex.P.2 : Spot Mahazar Ex.P.2[a] : Signature of PW.2 Ex.P.2[b] : Signature of PW.3 Ex.P.3 : Seizure Mahazar Ex.P.3[a] : Signature of PW.2 Ex.P.3[b] : Signature of PW.3 Ex.P.4 : Portion of the statement of PW.2 Ex.P.5 : Written information/Complaint Ex.P.5[a] : Signature of PW.3 Ex.P.6 : FIR Ex.P.6[a] : Signature of PW.3 LIST OF M.O's MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION :
MO.1: Samsung Mobile [Display broken] 16 C.C.No.1492/2019 LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR ACCUSED :
NIL LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR ACCUSED :
NIL .......................................................................................
Dictated on : 12.12.2024
Transcribed on : 12.12.2024
checked on : 13.12.2024
Signed on : 13.12.2024
[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