Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Bangalore District Court

State By vs Accused Statements U/Sec.313 Of ... on 30 August, 2019

                           1                      CC No.29060/14

   IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
             MAGISTRATE, AT BANGALORE.


                  Dated this 30th day of August, 2019

                Present :Sri.Prakash Channappa Kurubett
                                        B.Sc., LL.B.(Spl).,
                         IX Addl.C.M.M.Bangalore.

                JUDGMENT U/SEC.355 OF CR.PC.

1.C.C.No.                  29060/2014

2.Date of Offence          23/09/2016

3.Complainant              State by:
                           Kalasipalya Police Station

4.Accused                  Anil S/o.Pratap,
                           Aged about 36 years,
                           R/No.18, 1st Cross,
                           CKC Garden,
                           Kalasipalya, Bengaluru.

5. Offences complained     U/Sec.51(B) &  of Copyright Act.
of

6.Plea                     Accused pleaded not guilty.

7.Final Order              Accused is acquitted

8.Date of Order            30/08/2019
                            2                    CC No.29060/14


                            REASONS

        The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kalasipalya Police Station has

filed this charge against the accused for the offences punishable

U/Sec. 51(B) and 63 of Copyright Act.



2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, on

23/09/2016 at about 6.15 p.m. within the limits of Kalasiplya

Police Station, at Honda Point shop, Kalasipalya J.C.Colony, 3 rd

Cross Road, Bengaluru, accused person was selling the duplicate

spare parts of Hero Honda, Bosch and MICO Company spare

parts      to   the   public,   without    obtaining   the    valid

permission/license from the copyright owner and infringed the

right of the copyright of the said company. Hence, CW.1 - Harish

Kumar - EIPR Company lodged first information. The Station

House Officer registered a case in Cr.No.157/16 for the offences

punishable u/Sec.51(B) and  of Copyright Act, and submitted

First Information Report to this Court. After investigation, Sub-
                          3                    CC No.29060/14

Inspector of Kalasipalya Police Station filed charge sheet for the

said offences punishable u/Sec. 51(B) and 63 of Copyright Act

against the accused person.      Hence, he has committed the

alleged offences.



3.   The accused is on bail.    On receipt of charge sheet, this

court took the cognizance of the alleged offences and furnished

copy of the prosecution papers to the accused. After hearing on

charge, my learned Predecessor-in-Office has framed charge

against accused for the offences punishable U/Sec.51(B) and 

of Copyright    Act, for which accused pleaded not guilty and

claims to be tried.



     4.   The prosecution in order to prove its case, has not

examined any of the witnesses. In spite of repeated issuance of

NBW and proclamation against CWs.1 to 6 the concerned agency

failed to execute the same to the said witnesses and brought
                           4                      CC No.29060/14

them before this court, hence prayer of learned Sr.APP is rejected

and dropped CWs.1 to 6 and closed the side of the prosecution

evidence. As there is no incriminating circumstances against the

accused, accused statements U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. is dispensed

with and posted for judgment.


     5.     I have heard the arguments on both sides.

     6. In order to prove the guilt of the offences as alleged

against the accused by the prosecution, the prosecution has not

at all examined any one of the witnesses. The I.O. has filed this

charge sheet against the accused by citing 6 witnesses as CWs.1

to 6. In spite of repeated issuance of NBW and proclamation, the

concerned     agency,   more   particularly,   Investigating   Officer

himself has not turned up and also failed to brought the said

witnesses before this Court for evidence. Hence, prosecution has

utterly failed to prove the guilt of the accused as alleged against

the accused beyond reasonable doubt.           Therefore, accused is

entitled for acquittal. Hence, I proceed to pass following;
                                 5                         CC No.29060/14

                                     ORDER

Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused is acquitted for the offences punishable u/Sec.51(B) and 63 of Copyright Act.

The bail bond and surety bond of accused shall remain in force till 6 months.

The property seized under P.F. No.100/16 shall be destroyed after appeal period is over. (Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer and print out taken by her is verified, corrected & then pronounced by me in the Open Court dated this the 30th day of August, 2019.) (P.C.Kurubett) IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bengaluru.

ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:

NIL.

List Of Documents Marked On Behalf Of The Prosecution:

NIL.

List Of Material Objects Marked On Behalf Of The Prosecution:

NIL List of witnesses examined, documents and materials marked on behalf of the defence:

NIL IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bangalore.