Bangalore District Court
State By Central Crime Branch (Ocw) vs Nos.1 To 5 For The Offences Punishable ... on 16 March, 2018
IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL.CMM: BENGALURU
Dated this the 16th day of March 2018.
Present: Shri V.Jagadeesh, B.Sc., LL.M.
I Addl. C.M.M BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT U/s.355 Cr.P.C.,
Case No. : C.C.No.650/2011
Date of Offence : 15.7.2010
Name of complainant : State by Central Crime Branch (OCW),
N.T.Pet, Bengaluru.
Name of accused : 1. Umesh,
2.Jayakumar @ Samuel @ Shyam
s/o Swamy, aged 38 years,
r/o No.11/4, 80 feet Kengeri ring road,
Nagadevanahalli, near Jnanabharathi
Check Post, Kenchanapura,
Bengaluru.
3. Harish @ Stephen
s/o Subramanya, r/o No.61,
2nd main road, New Bamboo Bazaar,
Mysore,
4. Jagadeeshkumar s/o Narayan Lalji,
aged 40 years, r/o No.335/14,
8th main, 4th block, Rajajinagar,
Bengaluru,
2
C.C.No.650/2011
5. Manjunatha V. Shet s/o Vittalkar,
aged 30 years, No.118,
14th main, III Block, Jayanagar,
Bengaluru 560 011
(accused No.1 split up)
Offences complained off: U/s. 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 420, 37
of IPC.
Plea of accused Nos.2 to 5: Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : As per final order
Date of Order : 16-3-2018.
JUDGMENT
The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch (OCW), N.T. Pet, Bengaluru has filed the charge sheet against the accused Nos.1 to 5 for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 420 and 379 of I.P.C.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that, the accused persons with common intention to commit fraud, have created credit cards and produced the said credit cards to purchase items in several shops including the shop of 3 C.C.No.650/2011 C.W.18 and also other malls. Under such circumstances, a case has been registered by the C.C.B. police against the accused Nos.1 to 5 for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 420 and 379 of I.P.C in Crime No.228/2010. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet against the accused Nos.1 to 5 for the aforesaid offence.
3. During the pendency of the trial, case against the accused No.1 was split up and separate case has been registered against him in C.C.No.29828/2014. Therefore, the present case is continued only against the accused Nos.2 to 5.
4. After appearance of the accused, necessary documents as relied by the prosecution, are furnished to the accused Nos.2 to 5 as provided under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. Charge has been framed and same is read over and explained to the accused Nos.2 to 5. The accused Nos.2 to 5 pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried. Therefore, the case was posted for prosecution evidence. 4 C.C.No.650/2011
5. C.Ws.1 to 34 have been cited as charge sheet witnesses. In order to prove the guilt of the accused Nos.2 to 5, during the course of trial, C.Ws.3, 1, 33 and 17 are examined as P.Ws.1 to 4 respectively and got marked Exs.P1 to P6 and identified M.Os.1 to 88. So far as other charge sheet witnesses are concerned, their presence is not secured, inspite of sufficient time and repeated issuance of summons and warrants. Therefore, they are dropped.
6. After completion of prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused Nos.2 to 5 was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. The accused Nos.2 to 5 have not adduced any defence evidence on their behalf. Therefore, there is no defence evidence on behalf of the accused Nos.2 to 5.
7. Heard the arguments of learned Senior A.P.P. and counsel appearing for accused. The points that would arise for my consideration are as under:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused 5 C.C.No.650/2011 Nos.2 to 5 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 420 and 379 of IPC?
2. What order ?
8. My answer to the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Negative. Point No.2: As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
9. Point No.1:- The contention of the prosecution is that the accused persons with common intention to commit fraud, have created credit cards and produced the said credit cards to purchase items in several shops including the shop of C.W.18 and also other malls and thereby the accused persons have committed the offences punishable under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 420 and 379 of I.P.C.
10. In order to prove the guilt of the accused Nos.2 to 5 for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 420 and 379 of I.P.C, C.W.3 is examined as 6 C.C.No.650/2011 P.W.1 who is none other than the mahazar witness. The mahazar is marked as Ex.P1. In the chief-examination P.W.1 has deposed that the police have obtained his signature on the mahazar. He does not know the purpose and police have not seized any items in his presence. Since, P.W.1 has not supported the case of the prosecution, he was treated as hostile witness and cross- examined by the learned Senior A.P.P. with the permission court, but in the course of cross-examination nothing has been elicited to prove the mahazar. Hence, his evidence is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused Nos.2 to 5.
11. C.W.1 is examined as P.W.2 who is a Police officer who has deposed that he has registered the case and investigated the matter for the alleged offences against the accused. P.W.2 has deposed with regard to his official duty discharged by him with regard to registration of the case, seizure of certain documents and amounts. In the absence of any material evidence to prove that the accused Nos.2 to 5 have created credit cards and misused 7 C.C.No.650/2011 the same to purchase several items, his evidence is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused persons. It is also well settled principle of law that the complainant cannot be an Investigating Officer. Therefore, the evidence of P.W.2 is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused persons.
12. C.W.33 is examined as P.W.3 who has deposed that he has registered the complaint against the accused and submitted the records to C.C.B. for investigation, but in the cross-examination, P.W.3 has deposed to the following effect:
It is true to suggest that, there is no whisper or allegation against the accused No.4 in the complaint. The evidence of P.W.3 as above is also not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused Nos.2 to 5.
13. C.W.17 is examined as P.W.4 who is one of the victims of the alleged offences. Since P.W.4 has not supported the case of the prosecution, he was treated as 8 C.C.No.650/2011 hostile witness and cross-examined by the learned Senior A.P.P. with the permission court, but in the course of cross-examination nothing has been elicited to prove the guilt of the accused Nos.2 to 5. Therefore, viewed from any angle, I am of the opinion that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused Nos.2 to 5 for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 420 and 379 of I.P.C beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, it is held that the accused Nos.2 to 5 are entitled for acquittal for the alleged offences. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 in the negative.
14. Point No.2:- In view of my answer on the point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The accused Nos.2 to 5 are not found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 420 and 379 of I.P.C. Therefore, they are acquitted for the said offences under Section 248(1) Cr.P.C. 9 C.C.No.650/2011 The bail bonds executed by the accused Nos.2 to 5 and their surety stands cancelled.
Separate order will be made in respect of M.Os.1 to 88 in the split up case.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, revised and then corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 16th day of March 2018).
(V.Jagadeesh) I Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of prosecution:-
P.W.1, Sadiq, P.W.2, Balegowda, P.W.3, Gurusiddaramaiah, P.W.4, Gowrav Gupta;
List of documents marked on behalf of prosecution:-
Ex.P1, Seizure mahazar,
Ex.P1(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P1(b), Signature of P.W.2,
Ex.P2, Portion of statement of P.W.1,
Ex.P3, Complaint,
Ex.P3(a), Signature of P.W.2,
Ex.P3(b), Signature of P.W.3,
10
C.C.No.650/2011
Ex.P4, FIR,
Ex.P5, Letter issued by the Commissioner
of Police,
Ex.P6, Statement of P.W.4;
Material Objects Produced:-
M.O.1-
M.O.10, 10 Visa cards of ICICI Bank,
M.O.11-
M.O.15, 5 Master credit cards,
M.O.16-
M.O.54, 39 Visa Corporate cards of ICICI Bank,
M.O.55-
M.O.71, 17 Citi Bank Visa cards,
M.O.72-
M.O.88, 17 HSBC Master cards;
Witnesses examined on behalf of the defence, documents marked:- NIL.
(V.Jagadeesh) I Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.
11 C.C.No.650/2011 16/3/2018 State by Sr.APP Accused Nos.2 to 5 C/B For Judgment (Judgment pronounced in the Open Court) ORDER The accused Nos.2 to 5 are not found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 474, 420 and 379 of I.P.C. Therefore, they are acquitted for the said offences under Section 248(1) Cr.P.C.
The bail bonds executed by the accused Nos.2 to 5 and their surety stands cancelled.
Separate order will be made in respect of M.Os.1 to 88 in the split up case.
(V.Jagadeesh) I ACMM, Bengaluru.
12 C.C.No.650/2011 13 C.C.No.650/2011