Bangalore District Court
State By Hebbal Police vs No.1 Pulled Saree Of Cw2 And Insulted Her on 21 July, 2022
IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL.CMM: BENGALURU
Dated this the 21st day of July 2022.
Present: Shri Anand T Chavan, B.Com., LL.B(Spl.).
I Addl. C.M.M BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT U/s. 355 Cr.P.C.,
Case No. : C.C.No.4750/2019
Date of Offence : 16-2-2018
Name of complainant : State by Hebbal Police
Station, Bengaluru.
(By Learned Sr. APP)
Name of accused : 1.Sujith Gupta
S/o Sharavana Kumar
Gupta, aged 40 years,
2. Smt.Sabitha Sujith
D/o late J.P.Sarvesh,
aged 51 years,
3. Kavitha Sarvesh
D/o J.P.Sarvesh,
aged 51 years,
4. Smt.Kamala Bayi
W/o late J.P.Sarvesh,
aged 51 years,
All are R/o No.24/B, 1st main,
RMV 2nd Stage, 1st Block,
Ashwathnagar, Aramanenagar,
Bengaluru 94.
(By Shri Muchandi & Co., Advos.).
2 C.C.No.4750/2019
Offences complained off: U/s.143, 147, 324, 354, 504,
506, R/w Sec.149 of IPC.
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Accused are acquitted
Date of Order : 21-07-2022.
JUDGMENT
Assistant Commissioner of Police J.C.Nagar Sub Division has filed charge sheet against accused above named for offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 324, 354, 504, 506 R/w Sec.149 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of prosecution case are that :- On 16.02.2018, at 1.30 p.m. accused persons took away two computer CPUs and two computer monitors. When CW1 to 3 enquired about said fact to accused persons, accused no.2 abused them in filthy language and she assaulted C.W.2 with a calling bell which resulted in bleeding injury on her forehead. Thereafter, accused person formed unlawful assembly with an intention to commit riot 3 C.C.No.4750/2019 and they assaulted CW1 to 3 with hands. Further accused no.1 pulled Saree of CW2 and insulted her in front of other with an intention to outrage her modesty. Further accused no.1 threatened C.Ws.1 to 3 with dire consequences. Thereafter, on same day C.W.1 lodged first information before Hebbal Police station, which was registered by them in their PS Crime No.30/2018 and FIR is issued. Though initially FIR is lodged for above offences and for offences under section 3(1)(x) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocity) Act 1989, It shows that after recording statements of material witnesses, after collecting wound certificate and after completion of investigation, I.O. filed charge sheet against accused persons for offences punishable under section 143, 147, 324, 354, 504, 506 R/w. Section 149 of IPC.
3. After filing of this charge sheet, cognizance of alleged offences is taken and summons issued to 4 C.C.No.4750/2019 accused persons. Accused no.1 to 4 have appeared in pursuant to summons and they are enlarged on bail. Copies of charge sheet are furnished to them u/s 207 of Cr.P.C. and Charge is framed. Accused have not pleaded guilt of alleged offences and they have claimed to be tried.
4. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has got examined 8 witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 8 and got marked 6 documents as per Exs.P1 to P6. After completion of prosecution evidence, statement of the accused as required under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded. The accused have denied the incriminating evidence against them and they have not led any defence evidence.
5. On the basis of charge sheet allegation, the following points arose for consideration: 5 C.C.No.4750/2019
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused have committed offence punishable under section 143 R/w Sec.149 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused have committed offence punishable under section 147 R/w Sec.149 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused have committed offence punishable under section 324 R/w Sec.149 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused have committed offence punishable under section 354 R/w Sec.149 of IPC?
5. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused have committed offence punishable under section 504 R/w Sec.149 of IPC?
6. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused have committed offence punishable under section 506 R/w Sec.149 of IPC?
7. What order ?6 C.C.No.4750/2019
6. Heard arguments of learned Sr.APP and learned counsel for accused. Perused oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution. The following are findings to above points.
Point No.1 to 6 : In the Negative Point No.7: As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
7. Point No.1 to 6:- These points are taken together for consideration as findings on one point may have bearing on other points.
8. P.W.1 Rinku Mathappan W/o Thomas Philip, who is said to be principal of Gautham College has testified in her evidence that on 16-2-2018 at 3.00 p.m. when C.W.1 to 3 were in office, accused persons came to their chamber, they abused them in filthy language and took away CPU. She has further stated that 7 C.C.No.4750/2019 accused pulled Saree of C.W.2, they assaulted her, caused bleeding injury and threatened her with dire consequences. Further she identified accused persons before court. However, she has not specifically stated with regard to particular act done by each accused persons. In relevant portion of cross-examination, P.W.1 has admitted that accused no.1 has filed a crime no.27/2018 against herself, one Gavisiddappa and Hari Vardhan with regard to tearing of documents. She has pleaded ignorance to suggestion that accused no.1 has filed complaint in that regard on same day. She has also admitted that civil cases are pending between family members of accused persons with regard to above college. Hence entire evidence of this witness is denied by defence side in toto.
9. P.W.2 Manjula W/o Naranaswamy has also supported prosecution case and testified in his 8 C.C.No.4750/2019 evidence that on 16-2-2018 at 1.30 p.m. when C.W.1 to 3 were in office, accused persons came to their chamber, they abused them in filthy language and took away CPU. She further stated that accused pulled Saree of C.W.2, assaulted, caused bleeding injuries and threatened her with dire consequences. She has also identified accused persons before court. In cross examination, entire evidence of this witness is also denied by defence side in toto.
10. Most importantly CW1/ P.W.3 Dr.Sangeetha W/o Harivalagan who is one of victim of incident and first informant of the case has completely turned hostile by testifying that accused persons have not troubled her, they have not abused her, assaulted her, threatened her nor accused no.2 has caused any bleeding injury to CW2. Though she has identified complaint and mahazar as per Exs.P1 & P2 and her signatures on it as per Exs.P1(a) & P2(a), she has 9 C.C.No.4750/2019 stated that she does not know contents of said documents and police have not seized anything under Ex.P.2 mahazar. She has stated that when she had been to police station due to some family differences, her signatures were obtained on Exs.P1 and P2. Though this prime witness is treated as hostile and cross examined at length by learned Sr.APP, nothing worthwhile is elicited from her mouth to prove alleged incident.
11. P.W.4 Anitha Prasad W/o Dr.Prasad has testified that accused No.1 is her relative, accused No.2, accused No.3 are her sisters and accused No.4 is her mother. She has further specifically stated that on 16- 3-2018, when she had been to M.S. building on office duty, at that time her colleague called through phone and informed that accused have taken away computer and documents. Thereafter when herself, Sangeetha, Pryadarshini and her staff went to office of 10 C.C.No.4750/2019 accused No.3 at third floor, accused No.2 locked them in office. Thereafter her husband opened the door. Later when she was sitting in her office, accused No.2 assaulted C.W.2 with bell, other accused persons made tussle, pulled Saree of C.W.2 and abused them in filthy language. In cross-examination by defnce side, P.W.4 has admitted that there is order of Hon'ble High Court that CW1 shall not indulge in financial matters of the college. Entire evidence of this witness is also denied in toto and it is suggested to her that in view of property disputes of family she is deposing falsely. However evidence of this witness is not quite consistent to prosecution case and there are several improvements in it. Hence it is not safe to rely upon evidence of this witness.
12. P.W.5 Arul S/o Kashinath has identified his signature on Ex.P2 Spot Mahazar as per Ex.P2(b). However he has turned hostile by stating that he 11 C.C.No.4750/2019 signed it at police station and he does not know contents of said Mahazar. He has further stated that police have not seized anything in his presence under said Mahazar. Though this witness is treated as hostile and cross examined by prosecution, nothing is elicited from his mouth to prove above mahazar or seizure of incriminating articles from the spot.
13. P.W.6 Rajesh V. S/o Verabhadrappa the then PSI of Hebbal P.S and one of I.O. of this case has testified that on 16-2-2018 when he was on duty CW1 appeared before him and filed First Information, he received the same and registered the case in their PS Cr. No. 30/2018 and issued FIR. He identified First Information, FIR and his signature on said documents. Defence side has denied his entire evidence in cross examination and he pleads ignorance to suggestion that on same day accused had lodged complaint against CW1.
12 C.C.No.4750/2019
14. CW2/ P.W.7 Priyadarshini W/o Vijaya Palsingh who is said to be other victim of the case has testified on 16-3-2018 when herself, C.Ws.1 and 3 had been to M.S. building and when they returned to office, accused no.2 took away the computers. Thereafter, when they went to office of accused No.3, accused No.2 abused her in filthy language and assaulted her. Further when she tried to take back computers, accused No.2 pushed them inside and locked the door. She has further stated that accused No.2 abused them in filthy language and accused No.3 assaulted her on head with calling bell. Thereafter all accused threatened them with dire consequences. In cross examination by defence side, P.W.7 has admitted that one day prior to incident, she, C.Ws.1 and 3 had demanded their share in college and other properties to accused no.3 and 4 and said accused refused to give their share. She has denied to know that accused have filed a civil case against her. Entire evidence of 13 C.C.No.4750/2019 this witness is also denied and it is suggested to her that she is deposing falsely by filing false case, in view of said case.
15. P.W.8 Krishnappa B. S/o Venkateshappa the them DYSP JC Nagar sub division Bengaluru and other I.O. of this case has testified in his evidence that 9-6-2018 he received wound certificate of complainant and injured C.W.2 as per Exs.P4 & P5 , on 29-6-2018 he received caste certificate from complainant, C.Ws.2 and 3 as per Ex.P6 and thereafter he handed over further investigation of the case to CW12. However in cross-examination, PW8 has admitted that CW1 did not give her caste certificate and during investigation it was found that both side parties belong to same caste. Further entire evidence of this witness is also denied and it is suggested to him that though it came to his notice that cases of properties are pending 14 C.C.No.4750/2019 against them, he has filed false case and deposing falsely.
16. Further CW5 eye witness and CW 9 medical officer are not secured and they are dropped. Further CW 12 who is other I.O. has not entered into witness box. Hence wounds on CW 1 and 2 are not proved to satisfaction of Court. Thus on perusal of evidence of prosecution, it shows that except interested evidence of P.Ws.1 to 4, absolutely there is nothing on record to prove alleged incident. Moreover PW3 who is said to be one of victim of the case has turned hostile and evidence of other victims i.e., P.w4 and 7 is not quite consistent. Further it shows that no independent witnesses are either cited as witnesses in charge sheet. Further in view of hostile evidence of PW5 Pancha, seizure of incriminating articles from spot and conducting of spot mahazar as per Ex.P.2 is also not proved to satisfaction of the 15 C.C.No.4750/2019 Court. Hence evidence of above witnesses cannot be relied upon to prove the guilt of accused. Further none of victims and other witnesses including CW2/ PW.7 have specifically testified with regard to alleged act of accused no.2 in pulling her Saree and quite contrary to prosecution case and averments of Ex.P1 she has stated that accused no.3 assaulted her with calling bell. For these reasons prosecution case is surrounded with serious suspicious circumstances and it is incumbent to hold that prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that accused No.1 to 4 have committed alleged acts of forming unlawful assembly, riot, assault, outraging modesty of C.W.2 and usage of abusive words and thereby accused have committed offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 324, 354, 504, 506 R/w Sec.149 of IPC. Hence point no.1 to 6 are answered in the Negative. 16 C.C.No.4750/2019
17. Point No.7: - For the reasons stated and findings given on point No.1 to 6, following is:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 to 4 are acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 324, 354, 504, 506 R/w Sec.149 of IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused to shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stand canceled automatically.
Seized Plastic stand, Plastic lid and calling bell being worthless shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal period.
( (Typed by the stenographer directly on computer, revised, corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 21 st day of July 2022).
(Anand T Chavan) st 1 Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for prosecution :-
P.W.1, Rinku Mathappan,
17 C.C.No.4750/2019
P.W.2, Manjula,
P.W.3, Dr.Sangeetha,
P.W.4, Anitha Prasad,
P.W.5, Arul,
P.W.6, Rajesh V.
P.W.7 Priyadarshini,
P.W.8, Krishnappa B.;
List of exhibits marked for prosecution :-
Ex.P1, Complaint, Ex.P1(a), Signature of P.W.3, Ex.P1(b), Signature of P.W.6, Ex.P2, Spot mahazar, Ex.P2(a), Signature of P.W.3, Ex.P2(b), Signature of P.W.5, Ex.P3, First Informant report, Ex.P3(a), Signature of P.W.6, Ex.P4 & Ex.P5, Wound certificates, Ex.P4(a) & Ex.P5(a), Signatures of P.W.8, Ex.P6, Caste certificate, Ex.P6(a), Signature of P.W.8; List of material object : NIL
List of Witnesses examined for defence:- NIL List of documents marked for defence:- NIL 1 st Addl. CMM., Bengaluru 18 C.C.No.4750/2019 19 C.C.No.4750/2019 Judgment pronounced in Open Court (vide separate judgment) ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 to 4 are acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 324, 354, 504, 506 R/w Sec.149 of IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused to shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stand canceled automatically.
Seized Plastic stand, Plastic lid and calling bell being worthless shall be destroyed after expiry of appeal period.
1st ACMM, Bengaluru.