Bangalore District Court
State By Central Crime Branch (Women And vs Bilal Ahamed Quota @ Imran Jalal S/O ... on 6 September, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL.C.M.M, Bengaluru
Present: Smt. Hema Pastapur
B.A.,LL.B.,
I Addl. C. M. M, Bengaluru
C.C.No.10701/2007
Dated this the 6th day of September 2016
Judgment under section 355 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
Complainant:- State by Central Crime Branch (Women and
Narcotics) Squad, Bengaluru.
(By Learned Senior Assistant Public Prosecutor)
VS
Accused:- Bilal Ahamed Quota @ Imran Jalal s/o Samshuddin
Quota, age:34 years, r/o No.16, Sadarbal,
Hazarathbal, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir State.
Now at r/o No.216, Ranipet, Hospet, Bellary district.
(By Shri C. P., Advocate)
Offences complained : U/secs 201, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and
120(B) of Indian Penal Code and u/sec
12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967.
2 C.C.No.10701/2007
Opinion of the Court : Accused is found guilty
Date of Judgment : 06-09-2016.
JUDGMENT
1. That, the Police Inspector of Central Crime Branch (Women and Narcotics Squad), Bengaluru, has filed the Final report against the accused for the offence punishable under sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 420, 201 and 120(B) of Indian Penal Code and under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967.
2. That, the allegation of the prosecution is that the accused is a follower of Islam and an active member of banned organization of Laskare-E-Toiba (L-E-T) which is banned under unlawful activities Prevention) Act, 1967. That, the accused went to Pakistan and met with Pakistan based L-E-T leader Alqama @ Lalkhan (Operational commander of L-E-T India operation) and returned back to India. It is further allegation of the prosecution that, the accused to conceal the evidence for having visited the Pakistan had destroyed the passport bearing number A-1306951 which was obtained by him with the help of one Shri Rakesh. That, in the year 2002, the accused conspired with the said Rakesh in Bengaluru to obtain fresh passport 3 C.C.No.10701/2007 to him to visit Pakistan and for which he submitted before the passport authorities his false name and address as Imran Jalal s/o Jalaluddin, No. 14, 7th cross, Hongasandra, Bengaluru- 68 and submitted his application along with fake ration card and SSLC marks card as a proof of his residence and age and also concealed before the said passport authorities about the receipt of his first passport and obtained the second passport bearing number E-3023968 and visited the Pakistan via Hattari International check post Rail on 30-03-2006 and returned back to India on 13-04-2006.
3. That, on complaint being lodged the Madiwala Police Bengaluru, have registered the case against the accused. That, thereafter, the matter was referred to Central Crime Branch (Women and Narcotics), Bengaluru. That, the Investigating Officer after completion of investigation filed the Final report against the accused for aforesaid offences.
4. That, this Court took the cognizance of the aforesaid offences. That, the accused is under body warrant. That, the provisions of section 207 of Code of Criminal Procedure, have complied here with. That, the charge of the accused has framed and read over to him in 4 C.C.No.10701/2007 language known to him and he submitted that the Rakesh has made passport to him and he stayed 15 days and met his relatives and returned back and he claimed to be tried. That, after completion of prosecution side evidence the statement of accused as contemplated under section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, has recorded and read over to him and he denied all incriminating evidence appearing against him and not chosen to lead either oral or documentary evidence on his behalf.
5. That, I have heard the arguments and perused the materials placed on record. That, the following points arise for My consideration and determination:-
1. Whether the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubt that, accused by suppressing about his first passport bearing number A-1306951 and conspiring with the said Rakesh by furnishing his false name, address and forged and fake documents to the regional passport authorities, Bengaluru, had obtained the second passport bearing number E-3023968 and thereby has committed the offence punishable under sections 419, 462, 468, 471, 420 and 120(B) of 5 C.C.No.10701/2007 Indian Penal Code and under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967?
2. Whether the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused to conceal the evidence for having visited Pakistan destroyed the passport bearing number A-1306951 and thereby has committed the offence punishable under section 201 of Indian Penal Code ?
3. What order?
6. That, the prosecution to prove its above case has got examined PWs1 to 15 and got marked the documents at EXsP1 to P21(a) and closed its side.
7. That, My answer to the aforesaid points are as under:-
Point No.1:- In the AFFIRMATIVE Point No.2:- In the AFFIRMATIVE Point No.3:- As per the final order for the following:-
REASONS
8. Points No.1 and 2:- That, as these points are inter-linked, I have taken them for joint discussion to avoid repetition of facts. 6 C.C.No.10701/2007 It is allegation of the prosecution is that the accused is a follower of Islam and an active member of banned organization of Laskare-E- Toiba (L-E-T) which is banned under unlawful activities Prevention) Act, 1967. That, the accused went to Pakistan and met with Pakistan based L-E-T leader Alqama @ Lalkhan (Operational commander of L- E-T India operation) and returned back to India. It is further allegation of the prosecution that, the accused to conceal the evidence for having visited the Pakistan destroyed the passport bearing number A-1306951 which was obtained by him with the help of one Rakesh. That, in the year 2002, the accused conspired with the said Rakesh in Bengaluru to obtain fresh passport for him to visit Pakistan and for which he submitted to the passport authorities his false name and address as Imran Jalal s/o Jalaluddin, No.14, 7th cross, Hongasandra, Bengaluru- 68 and submitted his application to the said passport authorities along with fake ration card and SSLC marks card as a proof of his residence and age and also concealed before the said passport authorities about the receipt of his first passport and obtained the second passport bearing number 7 C.C.No.10701/2007 E-3023968 and visited the Pakistan via Hattari International check post Rail on 30-03-2006 and returned back to India on 13-04-2006.
9. It is to be noted here that, before going through the evidence of witnesses on record it is very much necessary to have a glance over the provisions of sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 420, 201 and 120(B) of Indian Penal Code and under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act.
(i) It is pertinent to note here that, in order to bring home an offence under section 419 of Indian Penal Code, the elements of section 416 of Indian Penal Code are to be proved i.e., (i) pretention by a person to some other person, (ii) knowingly substituting one person for another and (iii) representation that he or any other person is a person other than he or such other person really is. It is pertinent to note here that, to bring home a charge under section 419 of Indian Penal Code, the person said to be deceived must be shown to have been cheated by the personation and this brings into the field the necessity of establishing the ingredients for cheating namely that there should be deception or intentionally inducing the victim to do or to do anything which he would not omit if he were not so deceived.8 C.C.No.10701/2007
(ii) It is to be noted here that, for the offence of cheating under section 420 of Indian Penal Code, there must be deception which should always precede the fraudulent or dishonest inducement and it must be established that the intention of the accused was dishonest at the time of making the promise.
(iii) It is to be noted here that, to establish charge on criminal conspiracy under section 120(B) of Indian Penal Code, the prosecution must prove the agreement between two or more persons to do cause to be done some illegal act or some act which is not illegal by illegal means and this fact can be proved by direct or circumstantial evidence.
(iv) It is pertinent to note here that, to constitute an offence punishable under section 201 of Indian Penal Code, it must be proved that the accused have actively participated in the matter of causing disappearance of evidence and the proof of an offence is an essential requisite for bringing home the offence punishable under section 201 of Indian Penal Code.
(v) It is pertinent to note here that, to convict the accused for the offence punishable under section 468 of Indian Penal Code, the 9 C.C.No.10701/2007 prosecution is required to establish that the accused had committed the forgery and that he did it with the intention that the document forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating.
(vi) It is pertinent to note here that, to convict the accused for the offence punishable under section 471 of Indian Penal Code, the prosecution must prove that the accused had used the forged document as a genuine document.
(vii) It is to be noted here that, to bring home the charge under section 467 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the prosecution must to prove that, the accused has forged the document which purports to be a valuable security or will, or an authority to adopt a son, or which purports to give authority to any person to make or transfer any valuable security, or to receive the principal, interest or dividends thereon, or to receive or deliver any money, movable property, or valuable security, or any document purporting to be an acquittance or receipt acknowledging the payment of money, or an acquittance or receipt for the delivery of any movable property or valuable security.
10 C.C.No.10701/2007
(viii) It is significant to note here that, to bring home the under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act 1967, the prosecution must prove that the accused by suppressing the materials facts has obtained the passport from the concerned authorities.
10. It is pertinent to note here that, on background of aforesaid provisions now let us analyze the evidence of witnesses on record.
It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has got examined CW1-Shri K. N. Ramesh Chandra s/o N. Nagaraja Rao -the Complainant as PW1. It is pertinent to note here that, PW1 in his examination-in-chief has deposed that prior to him one Shri Pratap Singh, ACP of Yashwanthpur Sub- Division was investigating the case and during the course of said investigation it was found that accused was possessing two passports in different names and different addresses and during the interrogation it revealed that on basis of said passport he visited Pakistan twice and during the first visit the accused had been to Pakistan as a member of JKLF and later on he joined LET a militant organization and second time he visited Pakistan for LET activities and during that time he obtained the passport by giving a fake Madiwala address by creating 11 C.C.No.10701/2007 fake ration card, marks card and other documents showing his name as Imran Jalal and on preliminary enquiry they came to know that the accused got prepared the said fake passport with the help of one Rakesh who is said to be an agent.
11. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has got examined CW37-Shri T. P. Muthanna s/o T. A. Pemmaiah-the then Deputy General Manager of Canara Bank as PW2. It is pertinent to note here that, PW2 in his examination-in-chief has deposed that on 09-01-2007 the C.C.B. police have sent a letter to him for furnishing the details of S.B. Account no.5336 which was belonging to one Imran Jalal. That, PW2 has further deposed that on the basis of said application he furnished the said information to the C.C.B. Police. It is to be noted here that, the prosecution in evidence of PW2 has got marked EXsP2 to P8.
12. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has further got examined CW29- Shri P. Kumaran s/o M. Periya Swamy- the then Joint Secretary, Passport Office, Bengaluru as PW3. It is pertinent to note here that, PW3 in his examination-in-chief has deposed that one D.C.P. Crime 12 C.C.No.10701/2007 Ravikanthe Gowda had asked him the photocopy of the passport application by name Shri Bilal Ahmed and they have checked in their records and gave him a copy of the application Form along with passport application with cash receipt and all supporting documents. That, PW3 has further deposed that the said passport was issued to said Bilal Ahamed in the year 1996. That, PW3 in his evidence has further deposed that on 21-03-2007 the said D.C.P. Ravikanthe Gowda wants to know whether those passports issued to somebody called Imran Jalal or Bilal Ahmed. It is pertinent to note here that, PW3 has further deposed that, after verifying the records he confirmed that as passport bearing number E-3023968 was issued by the Bengaluru passport Office and he gave a copy of the full application Form and supporting documents to the said Ravikanthe Gowda. That, PW3 has further deposed that the records pertaining to second passport bearing number E-3023968 were not found in their office and thereafter the said Ravikanthe Gowda wrote the letter to the said office asking to check the name of Bilal Ahamed Quota. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution in evidence of PW3 has got marked the letter written by him to the said D.C.P. at EXP9, reply 13 C.C.No.10701/2007 sent by CW31 to Ravikanthe Gowda at EXP11 and attested copy of passport application Form of the applicant at EXP13.
13. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has further got examined CW36-Shri S. P. Shadakshari s/o Late S.M. Prabhu Swamy-the then Deputy Commissioner and District Commissioner, Chikkamagaluru as PW4. It is pertinent to note here that, PW4 in his examination-in -chief has deposed that on 26-03-2007 he received a letter from C.C.B. police and in said letter the C.C.B. Police have sought the information in respect of ration card bearing number AEAJM072-21651. It is pertinent to note here that, PW4 has further deposed that he searched the records and sought the information from the concerned authorities in respect of the said ration card and furnished the report to the C.C.B. police as per EXP13.
14. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has further got examined CW34- Shri K. L. Narasimhamurthy s/o Late K. L. Lakshmana as PW5. It is pertinent to note here that, PW5 in his examination-in-chief has deposed that on 26-03-2007 he received a letter from C.C.B. police 14 C.C.No.10701/2007 and in said letter the police sought the information with regard to the ration card issued in the name of one applicant Smt. Saleema Bhanu and in pursuance of the said letter he submitted his report to the police as per EXP14.
15. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has further got examined CW38-Shri Manjunathaswamy L. s/o Lakshminarasimhaiah-the then Assistant Revenue Officer as PW6. It is pertinent to note here that, on 21-04-2007 the C.C.B. police have sought the information from him about Smt. Saleema Bhanu and others. It is pertinent to note here that, PW6 has deposed that after making an enquiry he submitted his report to the police as per EXP15.
16. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has further got examined CW13-Shri B. R. Ravikanthe Gowda s/o B. Ramanna- the then D.C.P, Bengaluru as PW7. It is pertinent to note here that, PW7 in examination-in-chief has deposed that on 30-03-2007 he received the letter sent by Regional Passport Authority, Bengaluru, along with passport application of the accused.
17. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its case 15 C.C.No.10701/2007 has further got examined CW39-Smt.Manjula Kumari B. G. w/o Bharath as PW8. It is pertinent to note here that, PW8 in her examination-in-chief has deposed that on 26-04-2007 the C.C.B. police have furnished to her one SSLC marks card belonging to accused and asked about the genuineness of the said document.
18. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has further got examined CW40-Shri K. B. Chikka Bettaiah s/o Boraiah- the retired A.C.P. as PW11. It is pertinent to note here that, PW11 in his deposition has deposed that the investigation officer asked him for furnishing the copy of the voter list belonging to the accused and in pursuance of the same he furnished the said voter list.
19. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has further got examined CW35-Shri K. Gangappa Gowda s/o K. Lokanna Gowda as PW15. It is pertinent to note here that, PW15 in his evidence has deposed that on 26-03-2007 the C.C.B. police have furnished to him one xerox copy of the SSLC marks card and asked him for furnishing the details of genuineness of the said marks card and in pursuance of the said letter he made an enquiry 16 C.C.No.10701/2007 about the genuineness of the said marks card and he came to know that the said document is a fake document.
20. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has further got examined CW42-Shri C. Hanume Gowda s/o Late Chikke Gowda- the then Head Constable of Madiwala Police Station as PW9. It is pertinent to note here that, PW9 in his evidence has deposed that he went to Hongasandra for verification of the address furnished by one Imran Jalal for obtaining passport and later on the person named in the said address came to their Police Station and furnished the documents and they have verified the documents brought by him and recorded his statement. It is pertinent to note here that, PW9 has further deposed that in the month of January 2007 from medias and newspaper he came to know about the involvement of said person in terrorist activities.
21. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has further got examined CW46-Shri Thammaiah M. K s/o Kushalappa M. K- the then Police Inspector of C.C.B. as PW10. It is to be noted here that, PW10 in his examination-in-chief has deposed that on information sought by the investigating officer 17 C.C.No.10701/2007 the Officer, International Check Post, Hattare Railway Station, Amruthsar, Punjab on 23-04-2007 had sent the fax to their office stating that the accused on 30-03-2006 went to the Pakistan via International check post, Hattare and he returned back to India on 13-04-2006.
22. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its above case has further got examined CW43-Shri S. Chikka Siddaiah s/o Late Siddaiah- the then Head Constable and Writer as PW12. It is pertinent to note here that, PW12 in his examination-in-chief has deposed that on 20-10-2002 they have received one passport application belonging to Imran Jalal for verification and by entering the same in the register they have sent the said document to their assistant Writer for verification and thereafter, he went to said address and later on, said Imran Jalal came to their police station with some documents and they have recorded the statement of the said Imran Jalal. It is pertinent to note here that, PW12 has further deposed that in the year 2007 the C.C.B. police have enquired him and have recorded his statement and he came to know that the said Imran Jalal had got contact with L-E-T members at Pakistan. 18 C.C.No.10701/2007
23. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its case has further got examined CW41-Shri Kutubuddin Ghafud Shah s/o Ghafud Shah-the then Superintendent in Passport Office, Bengaluru, as PW13. It is pertinent to note here that, the C.C.B. police, Bengaluru, have sent the letter to him asking about the details of one Mr. Imran Jalal and for which he replied and forwarded the xerox copy of the passport application to the said police.
24. It is pertinent to note here that, the prosecution to prove its case has further got examined CW45-Shri Babu Anjanappa s/o Late T. Anjanappa- the then Police Sub-Inspector of Madiwala Police Station as PW14. It is pertinent to note here that, PW14 has deposed about the investigation conducted by him in present case.
25. It is pertinent to note here that, in the instant case though, the accused has cross-examined PWs1 to 15 in length, but, nothing worth has been elicited from them. It is significant to note here that, the accused in cross-examination of PW1 has elicited that in Complaint-EXP1 two passport numbers have been mentioned and he do not know whether the said passport numbers are genuine or fake. It is significant to note here that, the accused in cross-examination of 19 C.C.No.10701/2007 PW2 has elicited that on EXsP2 to 8 the crime number has not been mentioned and neither he nor the bank officials have signed on said documents as they are true copies. It is further significant to note here that, the accused in cross-examination of PW3 has elicited that the police have asked them about passport bearing number B- 1306901 and whereas, they have furnished the information pertaining to the passport bearing number A-1306951. It is pertinent to note here that, the accused in cross-examination of PWs4 to 6 and 11 has elicited that the Hongasandra village will not come within the vicinity of Bengaluru South division and the police have not provided to them the original documents and have tried to elicit that they have furnished their reports as per the say of police. It is pertinent to note here that, the accused in cross-examination of PW7 has elicited that in EXP2 two passport numbers have been mentioned and there are variations in said numbers. It is pertinent to note here that, the accused in cross-examination of PW8 has elicited that the Xerox copy of the marks card does not appear like original. It is further pertinent to note here that, the accused in cross-examination of PWs9 and 12 has tried to elicit that as per the say of say of CCB police they have 20 C.C.No.10701/2007 given their statements. It is significant to note here that the accused in cross-examination of PW10 has elicited that in EXP18-Fax-the time has been mentioned as 12 0' clock and 13 minutes and date as September 2009. It is pertinent to note here that, the accused in cross-examination of PW13 has tried to elicit that as the police have asked him to give the evidence before the Court he has deposed before the Court. It is pertinent to note here that, the accused in cross-examination of PWs14 and 15 has tried to elicit that they are not aware of the facts of the present. It is pertinent to note here that, the said contentions of the accused do not devoid the merits of the prosecution the case. It is further significant to note here that, in the instant case from entire evidence of PWs1 to 15 it clearly appears that the accused has not at all denied the case of the prosecution. It is significant to note here that, the accused even in his statement recorded by this Court under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has simply denied all incriminating evidence appearing against him. It is further significant to note here that as stated above the accused himself has submitted that the said Rakesh made the passport for him. It is pertinent to note the said submission of the 21 C.C.No.10701/2007 accused itself quite enough to hold that the accused conspiring with the said Rakesh had obtained the alleged passport by furnishing his false name, address and the forged and fake documents to the regional passport authorities, Bengaluru and to conceal the evidence for having visited the Pakistan had destroyed the passport bearing no. A-1306951 and used the said forged documents as genuine documents. It is pertinent to note here that, in the instant case the prosecution has proved all essential requisites of sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 201 r/w section 120(B) of Indian Penal Code and under section 12(1)(b) of Indian Passport Act, 1967. It is pertinent to note here that, in view of My above findings and without much discussion I hold that, the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 201 r/w section 120(B) of Indian Penal Code and under section 12(1)(b) of Indian Passport Act, 1967. In view of the same, points no.1 and 2 are answered in the AFFIRMATIVE.
26. Point No.3:- That, as discussed on points no.1 to 2, I proceed to pass the following:-
22 C.C.No.10701/2007
ORDER That, the accused is found guilty for the offence punishable under sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 201 r/w section 120(B) of Indian Penal Code and under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967.
To hear on sentence -
(Dictated to the stenographer, transcript thereof, computerized revised and then corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 6th day of September 2016).
(Hema Pastapur) I Addl. C. M. M, Bengaluru.23 C.C.No.10701/2007
Case is called out at 3-25 p.m. That, the Learned counsel for the accused is present and the Learned Sr.APP. is also present. That, the Learned counsel for accused has submitted that the accused is under body warrant since nine years. Hence, leniency may be shown to him. That, the learned Sr.APP., has submitted that the accused is Pakistani resident and it is exceptional case and under mitigated circumstances maximum punishment may be inflicted on accused.
(Hema Pastapur) I Addl.CMM, Bangalore.
ORDER ON SENTENCE That, acting under section 248(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused is convicted for the offence punishable under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 and 120(B) of Indian Penal Code and under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under section 419 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.5,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails 24 C.C.No.10701/2007 to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for one month.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under section 420 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.5,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for one month.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under section 467 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.5,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for one month.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under section 468 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.5,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for one month.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under section 471 of Indian Penal 25 C.C.No.10701/2007 Code and he shall deposit Rs.2,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for ten days.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under section 201 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.1,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for eight days.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under section 120(B) of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.1,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for eight days.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967 and he shall deposit Rs.5,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for one month.
That, the said sentences shall run concurrently. 26 C.C.No.10701/2007 That, the office is to furnish the copy of this judgment to the accused forth with.
(Hema Pastapur) I Addl.CMM, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution PW1: K. N. Ramesh Chandra s/o N. Nagaraja Rao;
PW2: T. P. Muthanna s/o T. A. Pemmaiah;
PW3: P. Kumaran s/o M. Peiyaswamy;
PW4: S. P.Shadakshariswamy s/o Late S.M.Prabhuswamy;
PW5: K. L. Narasimha Murthy s/o K. L. Laxman;
PW6: Manjunathswamy L. s/o Lakshmi Narasimhaiah;
PW7: B. R. Ravikanthegowda s/o B. Ramanna;
PW8: Smt. Manjula Kumari B.J. w/o Bharath;
PW9: C. Hanumegowda s/o Late Chikkegowda;
PW10: Thammaiah M. K. s/o Kushalappa M. K;
PW11: K. B. Chikka Bettaiah s/o Boraiah;
PW12: S. Chikka Siddaiah s/o Late Siddaiah;
27 C.C.No.10701/2007
PW13; Kutubuddin Ghafud Shah s/o Ghafud Shah;
PW14: Babu Anjanappa s/o Late T. Anjanappa and
PW15; K. Gangappa Gowda s/o K. Lokanna Gowda.
List of documents marked on behalf of the prosecution EXP1: Complaint;
EXP1(a): Signature of PW1;
EXP1(b): Signature of PW14;
EXP2: Attested copy of Letter dated:11.01.2007;
EXP3: Attested copy of Signature card with photo;
EXP4: Attested copy of S.B. Account opening Form;
EXP5: Declaration attested copy of Form No.5;
EXP6: Attested copy of residential certificate
of the accused;
EXP7: Copy of NF 269 Pass sheet;
EXP8: Statement of account pertaining to S. B.
account No.5336 (4 pages);
EXP9: Covering letter;
EXP9(a): Signature of PW2;
EXP10: Electronic record pertaining to passport ;
EXP11: Attested copy of reply sent by CW31 to
PW7 dated 22-03-2007;
28 C.C.No.10701/2007
EXP12: Attested copies of supporting documents of
EXP11;
EXP13: Report of PW4;
EXP13(a): Signature of PW4;
EXP14: Report of PW5;
EXP14(a): Signature of PW5;
EXP15: Report of PW6;
EXP15(a): Signature of PW6;
EXP16: Report of PW8;
EXP16(a): Signature of PW8;
EXP17: Certified copy of marks card;
EXP17(a): Signature of PW8;
EXP18: Fax reply;
EXP18(a): Signature of PW10;
EXP19: Reply sent by PW13 to CCB Inspector;
EXP19(a): Signature of PW13;
EXP20: FIR;
EXP20(a): Signature of PW14;
EXP21: Report of PW15 and
EXP21(a): Signature of PW15.
29 C.C.No.10701/2007
List of material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution Nil List of witnesses examined on behalf of the accused Nil List of documents marked on behalf of the accused Nil Date:08.09.2016 (Hema Pastapur) Place: Bengaluru I Addl. C. M. M, Bengaluru. 30 C.C.No.10701/2007 (Judgment pronounced in the Open Court, vide separate order) ORDER That, the accused is found guilty for the offence punishable under sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 201 r/w section 120(B) of Indian Penal Code and under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967.
To hear on sentence -
(Hema Pastapur) I Addl.CMM, Bangalore.
Case is called out at 3-25 p.m. That, the Learned counsel for the accused is present and the Learned Sr.APP. is also present. That, the Learned counsel for accused has submitted that the accused is under body warrant since nine years. Hence, leniency may be shown to him. That, the learned Sr.APP., has submitted that the accused is Pakistani resident and it is exceptional case and under mitigated circumstances maximum punishment may be inflicted on accused. 31 C.C.No.10701/2007
For further hearing on sentence by 7-9-2016.
(Hema Pastapur) I Addl.CMM, Bangalore.
32 C.C.No.10701/2007ORDER ON SENTENCE That, acting under section 248(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused is convicted for the offence punishable under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 and 120(B) of Indian Penal Code and under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under section 419 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.5,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for one month.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under section 420 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.5,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for one month.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under section 467 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.5,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails 33 C.C.No.10701/2007 to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for one month.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for three years for the offence punishable under section 468 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.5,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for one month.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under section 471 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.2,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for ten days.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under section 201 of Indian Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.1,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for eight days.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under section 120(B) of Indian 34 C.C.No.10701/2007 Penal Code and he shall deposit Rs.1,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for eight days.
That, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under section 12(1)(b) of the Passport Act, 1967 and he shall deposit Rs.5,000/- as a fine amount and if he fails to deposit the said fine amount, then he shall under go simple imprisonment for one month.
That, the said sentences shall run concurrently. That, the office is to furnish the copy of this judgment to the accused forth with.
(Hema Pastapur) I Addl.CMM, Bangalore.
35 C.C.No.10701/200736 C.C.No.10701/2007