Bangalore District Court
Ilakal Police Station vs Vijayananda Shivashankarappa ... on 13 March, 2024
1 CC.No.14002/2022
KABC030370542022
IN THE COURT OF XLII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.
Dated this the 13th day of March, 2024.
:Present:
Smt. PREETH. J., B.A.L., LLB.,
XLII Addl.CMM Judge,
(Spl. Court for trial of cases filed against sitting as
well as former MPs/MLAs,
triable by Magistrate in the State of Karnataka)
CC.No.14002/2022.
(Old.CC.No.487/2021)
Complainant: State by Illakal Police Station,
Hungunda Circle, Bagalkot District.
(By Lrd. Sr.A.P.P.,)
Vs.
Accused: 01. Vijayanda Shivashankrappa
Kashappanavar, 48 Years,
R/o.Illakal Joshigalli, Illakal Taluk,
Bagalkot.
02. Amaresh Sangappa Madivalar
Urf. Mudagal, 40 Years,
R/o.Illakal Gouligalli,
Illakal Taluk, Bagalkot.
03. Mahantesh Sangappa Naragund,
40 Years, R/o.Illakal Joshigalli,
Illakal Taluk, Bagalkot.
04. Veeresh Urf. Muttu Gangappa
Nalatawad, 46 Years, R/o.Illakal,
Illakal Taluk, Bagalkot.
2 CC.No.14002/2022
05. Srinivas Laxman Guram,
43 Years, R/o.Illakal Hosptet
Oni, Illakal Taluk, Bagalkot.
(By Sri.V.K.J., Advocate)
1. Date of commission of offence : 17.12.2020.
2. Date of report of offence : 17.12.2020.
3. Arrest of accused : Not applicable.
a) Date of arrest of accused : Not applicable.
b) Date of release on bail : 15.06.2022.
c) The period undergone in custody : Not applicable.
4. The name of the complainant : Sri.Ayyanagouda V. Patil.
5. The date of recording of evidence : 05.12.2022.
6. The date of closing of evidence : 01.02.2024.
7. Offences complained of : U/s.143, 147, 353, 504,
506. 174 and 201, R/w.
Sec.149 of IPC.
8. Opinion of the Judge : Accused found not
guilty.
=============
JUDGMENT
01. That the Station House Officer of Illakal Police Station, Hungunda Circle, Bagalkot District, has filed charge sheet against the Accused No.1 to 5 for the offences punishable under section 143, 147, 353, 504, 506, 174 and 201, R/w. section 149 of IPC.
02. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows:
On 17.12.2020, at 03.20 p.m., when CW-1 was interrogating 9 Accused Persons in Crime No.95/2000 in the 3 CC.No.14002/2022 Chamber of the CW-8, who had obtained anticipatory bail from the Hon'ble District & Sessions Court, Bagalkot, the Accused No.1 to 5 formed unlawful assembly with common object of committing the offence and entered the Chamber of CW8 and the Accused No.2 grabbed the hand of CW-10 who was doing video-
graphy as directed by CW-1 and Accused No.4 grabbed the video camera, Accused No.1 pointed his finger at CW-1 obstructed him from doing his public duty by saying "ಏ ಮಷಷ ರ ಇವರಗನ ವಚರಣ ಮಡಡ ಇದದ ದಯ ಜಮದನ ತಗದಕಕಕಕಡ ಕಳಸವದ ಅಷಷ ದ ನನನ ಕಲಸ, ಅವರಗಗ ಕ ನದಟದಸಕದಡಡ ಯ, ಮನಗ ಹದಗ ಡಗ ಟ ಮಡ ನದ, ಅವರಕ ನನನ ಮಕದ ವಚರಣಗ ಹಜರಗಬಕ, ಹಡಗಟ ಹಚಚ , ಬ ಮಗನ ನದಡತದನ ನನನ , ಬದ ಬಡಲ ನದಡತದನ, ಹರಗ ಬ ತರಸಡ ದನ ಅಕತ" and addressed the 9 Accused Persons of the above referred crime abusing CW-1 in filthy language by saying "ಬರರಲ ಬರರ ಏನ ಸಕಟ ಹರಕದತನ ಹರಕದಲ ಬ ಅಕತ"
and threatened CW-1 and 10 with dire consequences. Later, when CW-1 issued notice to Accused no.1 produce the vehicle bearing registration No.KA-03-M-W-8181 used by the Accused persons in the commission of this crime, he has deliberately not appeared before him and also concealed the vehicle elsewhere 4 CC.No.14002/2022 and destroyed the evidence and thereby the Accused No.1 to 5 have deterred the Police Officers from discharging their public duties and thereby committed the offences punishable under section 143, 147, 353, 504, 506, 174 and 201, R/w. section 149 of IPC.
03. On the basis of the complaint of CW-1, case has been registered under Cr.No.119/2020 against the Accused No.1 to 5 for the offences punishable under section 143, 147, 353, 504, 506, 174 and 201, R/w. section 149 of IPC. Thereafter, on completion of the investigation, the charge sheet has been filed against the Accused Persons. On receipt of charge sheet, the court took cognizance of the said offences.
04. On appearance of the accused No.1 to 5, they were enlarged on bail. The copies of the prosecution papers were furnished to the Accused Persons as contemplated under section 207 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, heard evidence before charge and framed charges, read over and explained to the Accused Persons in the language known to them for the above said offences. They have not pleaded guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the matter was posted for evidence. 5 CC.No.14002/2022
05. In order to bring home the guilt of the Accused Persons, the prosecution has examined all the 10 Witnesses as PW-01 to 10 and got marked 43 documents as Ex.P.01 to Ex.P.43. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the Accused No.1 to 5 were examined under section 313 of Cr.P.C., so as to enable them to answer the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. The Accused Persons have denied their involvement in the crime and did not choose to lead any defence evidence on their behalf.
06. I have heard the arguments addressed by the learned Sr. Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused.
07. The following points arise for my consideration:-
Point No.1: Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on 17.12.2020, at 03.20 p.m., at Illakal Police Station, in the Chamber of the CW-8, when CW-1 was interrogating 9 Accused Persons in Crime No.95/2000, the Accused No.1 to 5 herein formed unlawful assembly with a common object of committing the offence and thereby committed the offence punishable under section 143 R/w. section 149 of IPC?6 CC.No.14002/2022
Point No.2: Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place, the accused No.1 to 5 with common object committing the offence have committed rioting and thereby committed the offence punishable under section 147, R/w. section 149 of IPC?
Point No.3: Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place, the Accused No.2 grabbed the hand of CW-10 who was doing video-graphy and Accused No.4 grabbed the video camera and the Accused No.1 to 5 obstructed CW-1 from doing their public duty as a public servant and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 353, R/w. section 149 of IPC?
Point No.4: Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place, the Accused No.1 abused CW-1 and 10 in filthy language and insulted them intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause them to break the public peace or to commit any other offence and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 504, R/w. section 149 of IPC?
Point No.5: Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place, in furtherance of above said offence, the Accused Persons threatened CW-1 and 10 7 CC.No.14002/2022 with dire consequences and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 506, R/w. section 149 of IPC?
Point No.6: Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place, in furtherance of above said offence, concealed the vehicle used for commission of the offence inspite of issuance of notice to Accused No.1 by CW-1 to produce the same, and thereby destroyed the evidence and committed an offence punishable under section 174 and 201 R/w. section 149 of IPC?
Point No.7: What Order?
08. The findings of this court on the above points are:
Points No.1 to 6: In the Negative, Point No.7: As per final order for the following:
REASONS
09. Points No.1 to 6: As these points are interlinked, they are taken up together to avoid repetition of facts and circumstances of the case.
10. The prosecution has examined the complainant as PW- 1 and the eye-witnesses are examined as PW-6 to 8. All these witnesses are Police Officers who were alleged to be in the Police 8 CC.No.14002/2022 Station, when the alleged incident took place. PW-1, 6 to 8 have deposed that 9 persons who are the Accused Persons in Cr.No.95/2020 of IIlkal Police Station had come to the said Police Station along with the copy of the anticipatory bail order to appear before the I.O of the said case. They have deposed that CW-8 was the SHO of the said Police Station and CW-1 is the I.O of Cr.No.95/2020. They have deposed that CW-8 called CW-1 over phone and informed about the persons who had come to the Police Station along with anticipatory bail order, and accordingly, CW-1 came to the said Police Station at about 01-55 p.m. They have deposed that the said 9 persons were not giving proper information to CW-1 when he was conducting enquiry. As such, he had issued notice to 4 persons to appear before him on 18.12.2020 and for the remaining persons to appear before him on 19.12.2020 for investigation. But, they have refused to receive the said notices. PW-1 has deposed that in the anticipatory bail order one of the conditions was to co-operate for investigation as such he informed the said persons to contact their counsel and then receive the notice. They have deposed that by the time PW- 1 was instructing those 9 persons to receive the notice, the Accused Persons of this case entered the Chamber, where PW-1 9 CC.No.14002/2022 was conducting the investigation and they have showed him their finger and abused him. PW-1 in his evidence has deposed as follows:
"ಅಷಷ ರಲಲ ಮಧಗ ಹನ 320 ಗಟಗ ಈ ಪಪ ಕರಣದ ಅರದಪತರ ನನ ವಚರಣ ಮಡತಡ ದದ ಕಠಡಗ ಬದ ನನನ ಹತಡ ರ ಬರಳ ಮಡ ತದರಸ " ಹ ಮಸಷ ರನದನ ಏನ ವಚರಣ ಮಡತಡ ದಯ, ಜಮದನ ತಗದಕಕಡ ಕಳಹಸವದ ಅಷಷ ನನನ ಕಲಸ, ನದನ ಏನ ನದಟದಸಕಡತಡ ದಯ, ನದನ ಮನಗ ಹದಗ ಕಡ, ಅವರ ಯಕ ನನನ ಮಕದ ವಚರಣಗ ಹಜರಗಬಕ" ಎಕದ ಏರ ಧಧ ನಯಲಲ ಮತನಡತಡ ದದ ಗ ನನ ಕನನ ಪಪ ಕರ ವಚರಣ ಮಡತಡ ದದ ನ ಅವರಗ ಯರಗ ತಕದರ ಕಟಷ ರವದಲಲ ಎಕದ ತಳಸದಗ ಒಕದನ ಅರದಪತ "ಹ ಮಗನ ಕನನ ಮಡವವನ ನನ, ನದನ ಏನ ಕನನ ಬಗಗ ಹಳತಡ ದ, ನನನ ಮಕದ ಅವರ ಯಕ ಹಜರಗ ಬಕ ಅವರ ಯರ ಹಜರಗವದಲಲ , ನದನ ಏನ ಶಟ ಹರದ ಕಳಳ ತಡ ದಯದ ಹರಕದ ಸಳ ಮಗನ" ಎಕದ ಅವಚಗ ಶಬದ ಗಳಕದ ಬದ ಆ 9 ಜನರಗ ಕಡ ನದವ ಯರ ನದಟದಸ ತಗದ ಕಳಳ ಬಡ ಎಕದ ಹಳ ಅವರನನ ಕಠಡಯಕದ ಹರಗ ಕರದ ಕಕಡ ಹದಗತಡ ರವಗ ಒಕದನ ಅರದಪತನ ಜತ ಬದರವ ಅರದಪ2 ರಕದ 5 ರವರ ಪಲದಸರ ಏನ ಕತಡ ಕಳಳ ತಡ ರ ಅವರಗ ವಚರಣಗ ಸಹಕರಸಬಡ ಎಕದ ಒದರಡತಡ ದದ ರ.
ನನ ಎಲಲ ರಲಲ ಯ ಇದ ಪಲದಸ ತನಖಯ 10 CC.No.14002/2022 ಕಲಸ ಅಗದದ ದಯವಟಷ ಯವದ ರದತ ಕತರವಗ ಕಕ ಅಡಡ ಪಡಸದ ಸಹಕರಸ ಎಕದ ಹಳದಗ, ಒಕದನ ಅರದಪತ ನದನ ಏನ ಪಲದಸ ಕಲಸ ಮಡತಡ ದ, ಕಟಷ ಕಸ ಹಕರದ ಎಕದ ನನನ ನನ ಪಪ ಶನ ಸ ನದನ ಈ ತಲಕನನ ಬಡವದರ ಒಳಗ ನನನ ನನ ಸಸಸ ಕಡ ಮಡಸತಡ ದನ ಎಕದ ಹಳತಡ ಅಲಲ ದದ ವರನಲಲ ಕರದಕಕಡ ಹದಗವಗ ನದಟದಸ ತಗದಕಳಳ ಬಡ ಎಕದ ಹಳತಡ , ನನನ ನನ ಉದದ ದಶಸ ನದನ ಸಷ ದಷನಬಟಷ ಹರಗ ಬ ನದಡ ಕಳಳ ತಡ ದನ ಮಗನ ಎಕದ ಅವಚಗ ವಗ ಬದ ಹರಗಡ ಹಗತಡ ರವಗ ಅಲಲ ಯ ಹಜರದದ ಚಸ8 ಮತಡ 9 ರವರ ಪಲದಸ ಕಲಸಕಕ ಅಡಡ ಪಡಸಬಡ ಸಹಕರಸ ಎಕದ ಕಳಕಕಡರ ಸಹ ನದನ ಹರಗ ಬ ನದಡಕಳಳ ತಡ ದನ ಎಕದ ಗದರಸ ಜದವ ಬದರಕ ಹಕ ಹದಗದದ ಲಲ ದ ಸಕರರ ಕತರವಗ ಕಕ ಅಡಡ ಉಕಟ ಮಡರತಡ ರ".
11. From the above excerpted evidence, it goes to show that according to PW-1 all of the Accused No.1 to 5 had entered the Chamber, where PW-1 was allegedly conducting the investigation in Cr.No.95/2020 and deterred him from discharging his public duty and also abused him in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences. 11 CC.No.14002/2022
12. At this juncture itself, it is necessary to see as to what PW-6 to 8 have deposed, because they are said to be the eye- witnesses to the alleged incident. PW-6 has deposed as follows:
"ಮಧಗ ಹನ 03-20 ಗಟಗ ಹನಗಕದ
ಮತ ಕಕ ದತಪ ದ ಮಜ ಶಸಕರದ ಒಕದನ ಎಲಲ ರ
ಬಳ ಬಣಣ ದ ಕಎ-03-ಎಕಡಲ ಬಗ -8181 ಕರನಲಲ
ನಮಮ ಠಣಗ ಬದ ಪಎಸಐ ಕಚರಯಲಲ
ವಚರಣ ನಡಯತಡ ದದ ಗ ಮಲ ಹಳದ
ಆರದಪತರ ಕನನ ಮಡವವರ ನವ
ನದನ ಏನ ನದಟದಸಕಡತಡ ದಯ ಹರಗ ಬ
ನದಡಕಳಳ ತಡ ದನ ಎಕದ ಬದ ಕತರವಗ ಕಕ ಅಡಡ
ಉಕಟ ಮಡ ಜದವ ಭಯ ಹಟಷ ಸ ಅವಚಗ
ಶಬದ ಗಳಕದ ಬದರತಡ ರ ".
PW-7 has deposed as follows:
"ಮಧಗ ಹನ 03-20 ಗಟಗ ಹನಗಕದ
ಮತ ಕಕ ದತಪ ದ ಮಜ ಶಸಕರದ ಒಕದನ
ಆರದಪತ ಹಗ ಇತರ ಆರದಪತರ ಎಲಲ ರ
ಬಳ ಬಣಣ ದ ಕಎ-03-ಎಕಡಲ ಬಗ -8181 ಕರನಲಲ
ನಮಮ ಠಣಗ ಬದ ಪಎಸಐ ಕಚರಯಲಲ
ವಚರಣ ನಡಯತಡ ದದ ಗ ಮಲ ಹಳದ
ಆರದಪತರ ಚಸ-1 ರವರನನ ಉದದ ದಶಸ
ಜಮದನ ತಗದಕಕಡ ಕಳಹಸವದ ಅಷಷ ದ
ನನನ ಕಲಸ ಇಲಲ ಯಕ ನದಟದಸ
ಕಡತಡ ದಯ, ನದಟದಸ ಕಡವದದದ ರ ಅವರ
ಮನಗ ಹದಗ ಕಡ ಎಕದ ಏರ ಧಧ ನಯಲಲ
ಮತನಡರತಡ ರ. ಚಸ-1 ಮತಡ ಅಲಲ ದದ
12 CC.No.14002/2022
ಚಸ-8 ರವರ ಈ ಪಪ ಕರಣದ ಆರದಪತರಗ
ಕನನ ಪಪ ಕರನ ನದಟದಸ ಕಡತಡ ದದ ವ
ಎಕದ ತಳಸರತಡ ದವ. ಆಗ ಈ ಪಪ ಕರಣದ
ಆರದಪತರ ಚಸ-1 ರವರನನ ಉದದ ದಶಸ ಹ
ಮಗನ ಹರಗಡ ಬ ನನನ ನನ
ನದಡಕಳಳ ತಡ ದವ ಎಕದ ಬದರಕ ಹಕರತಡ ರ."
PW-8 has deposed as follows:
"ಮಲ ಹಳದ 9 ಜನ ಆರದಪತರ
ಜತಯಲಲ ಈ ಪಪ ಕರಣದ ಆರದಪತರದ 2
ಮತಡ 3 ರವರ ಕಡ ಬದದದ ಅವರ
ಹರಗಡ ಇದದ ರ. ಆರದಪ 2 ಮತಡ 3 ರವರ
ಚಸ-1 ರವರ ವಚರಣ ಮಡತಡ ದದ ಬಗಗ
ಹನಗಕದ ಮತ ಕಕ ದತಪ ದ ಮಜ ಶಸಕರದ
ಒಕದನ ಆರದಪತನಗ ತಳಸದ ಮರಗ ಒಕದನ
ಆರದಪತನ ಜತ 4ನ ಆರದಪತ ಕಕಡ
ಕರನಲಲ ನಮಮ ಠಣಗ ಬದ ಈ ಪಪ ಕರಣದ
ಆರದಪತರಲಲ ಸರ ಪಎಸಐ ರವರ ಕಠಡಯ
ಒಳಗ ಹದಗ ಅಲಲ ಕಳತದದ ಚಸ-1 ರವರನನ
ಉದದ ದಶಸ ಹ ಮದಸಷ ರ ಎಷಷ ಹತಡ
ಮಡತಡ ದಯ ಜಮದನ ತಗದಕಕಡ
ಕಳಹಸವದ ಅಷಷ ದ ನನನ ಕಲಸ ಎಕದ
ಹಳರತಡ ರ. ಆಗ ಚಸ-1 ರವರ ನರದಕಣ
ಜಮದನನಲಲ ಇರವ ಷರತಡ ಗಳನನ ನನ
ಅವರಗ ತಳಸತಡ ದದ ನ ಅವರಗ ಯವದ ರದತ
ತಕದರ ಮಡಲಲ ಎಕದ ಹಳರತಡ ರ.
ಅಷಷ ರಲಲ ಒಕದನ ಆರದಪತ ಚಸ-1 ರವರನನ
ಉದದ ದಶಸ ನದನ ಏನ ನನಗ ಹಳತಡ ದಯ
13 CC.No.14002/2022
ಕನನ ಮಡವವರ ನವ ಇದದ ವ ಎಕದ
ಹಳರತಡ ರ.
"ಒಕದನ ಆರದಪತ ಚಸ-1 ರವರನನ
ಉದದ ದಶಸ ನದನ ಹರಗ ಬ ನದಡಕಳಳ ತಡ ದನ
ಎಕದ ಬದ ಹರಗಡ ಹದಗತಡ ದರವಗ ಅಲಲ ದ
ಬಗಲಲ ನಕತದದ ಚಸ-8 ಮತಡ 9 ರವರ
ಒಕದನ ಆರದಪತನಲಲ ವಚರಣ ಮಡವಗ
ಯವದ ರದತಯ ಅಡ ತಡ ಮಡಬಡ ಎಕದ
ಹಳರತಡ ರ. ಒಕದನ ಆರದಪತ ಆದರ ಸಹ
ಮಲ ಹಳದ 9 ಜನ ಆರದಪತರಲಲ ನದವ
ನದಟದಸತಗದಕಳಳ ಬಡ ಏನ ಅರದ ಕಳಳ
ತಡ ನ ಅರದ ಕಳಳ ಲ ಎಕದ ಹಳರತಡ ರ."
13. All the three of them have deposed in some what similar lines i.e., to say that CW-1/PW-1 was on duty investigating in Crime No.95/2020 and the Accused of this case have deterred him from discharging his public duty. Now, the prime factor that the prosecution has to prove in this case is that, CW-1 was doing his public duty of investigation in the said crime and then, the question of deterring CW-10 from doing his public duty will have to be looked into. Admittedly, the prosecution has not produced even an iota of evidence to show that CW-1 was the I.O of Crime No.95/2020 and he was investigating the said case on the alleged date, time and place. It is the oral evidence of the 14 CC.No.14002/2022 prosecution that PW-1 had prepared notice calling upon those 9 persons to appear before him on two different dates for the purpose of investigation, but the said Accused have not received the same.
14. Now, in the case on hand, the copy of the said notices are also not produced in the case on hand. The documents of Crime No.95/2020, such the copy of the anticipatory bail order, copy of the notices, copy of the Case Diary are all very relevant for this case, because the same is the genesis for this crime. When, the prosecution is not able to prove before this court that PW-1 was doing his duty as an I.O in Cr.No.95/2020, this court cannot come to the conclusion that the Accused No.1 to 5 have deterred him from doing his public duty.
15. To reach to a logical conclusion whether the Accused are guilty of offence under Section 353 of IPC or not, it is apt to consider and analyze the necessary ingredients of Section 353 of IPC, which deals with an offence of assault or use of criminal force to deter a public servant from discharging his official duties.
Section 353 of IPC reads as under:-
15 CC.No.14002/2022
"353. - Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty.- Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person being a public servant in the execution of his duty as such public servant, or with intent to prevent or deter that person from discharging his duty as such public servant, or in consequence of anything done or attempted to be done by such person in the lawful discharge of his duty as such public servant, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both".
16. The above Section very categorically provides that in order to attract the offence, it is the duty of the prosecution to prove that there was assault or use of criminal force restraining public servant from performing his official duties or causing any act with intent to prevent or deter him from discharging his duty. Therefore, it is evident that to make out a case under Section 353 of IPC, the prosecution must meet essential requirements that a public servant must be assaulted or subjected to criminal force when he was carrying out his responsibilities; or with the goal of preventing or discouraging him from doing his duties. 16 CC.No.14002/2022
17. To establish as to whether the Accused have assaulted CW-1 or used any criminal force upon him, it is necessary to examine the definition of 'force', 'criminal force' and 'assault', which are defined in Sections 349, 350 and 351 of IPC, which are as under:-
"Section 349: Force - A person is said to use force to another if he causes motion, change of motion, or cessation of motion to that other, or if he causes to any substance such motion, or change of motion, or cessation of motion as brings that substance into contact with any part of that other's body, or with anything which that other is wearing or carrying, or with anything so situated that such contact affects that other's sense of feeling: Provided that the person causing the motion,or change of motion, or cessation of motion,causes that motion, change of motion, or cessation of motion in one of the three ways hereinafter described:
First.-By his own bodily power. Secondly.- By disposing any substance in such a manner that the motion or change or cessation of motion takes place without any further act on his part, or on the part of any other person.17 CC.No.14002/2022
Thirdly.-By inducing any animal to move, to change its motion, or to cease to move.
18. A reading of above Section makes it clear that a person is said to use force in any of the three methods mentioned above. The exertion of energy or power that causes a movement or change in the external environment is known as force. The term "force" as defined in this Section refers to force exerted by a person on another human.
"Section 350: Criminal force-Whoever intentionally uses force to any person, without that person's consent, in order to the committing of any offence, or intending by the use of such force to cause, or knowing it to be likely that by the use of such force he will cause injury,fear or annoyance to the person to whom the force is used, is said to use criminal force to that other".
"Section 351: Assault- Whoever makes any gesture, or any preparation intending or knowing it to be likely that such gesture or preparation will cause any person present to apprehend that he who makes that gesture or preparation is about to use criminal force to that person, is said to commit an assault".18 CC.No.14002/2022
Explanation.-Mere words do not amount to an assault. But the words which a person uses may give to his gestures or preparation such a meaning as may make those gestures or preparations amount to an assault".
19. From perusal of the above section, it is clear that the force that has been specified in Section 349 changes into a criminal force when the essential of Section 350 are satisfied. The essentials of Section 350 are intentional/deliberate use of force against anyone; without consent, when the claimed assault involves illegal conduct and the force has to be utilized in order to conduct an offence or to cause hurt or fear to another person. From the above provisions, it is also clear that assault and criminal force are two important elements of offence given under Section 353. In the case on hand, it is the case of the prosecution that the Accused No.1 pointed out his finger towards CW-1 and abused him. The relevant portion of the evidence of PW-1 is excerpted supra. But, pointing finger at a person will not amount to use of assault or use of criminal force. As such, based on the available evidence before this court, this court cannot come to the conclusion that 19 CC.No.14002/2022 the Accused have committed the offenece under Section 353 of IPC as projected by the prosecution.
20. The prosecution is relying upon the DVDs which are marked as Ex.P10 to 13. The witness who downloaded the videos to the said DVDs is examined as PW-9. The DVDs were also played in the open court, during the course of evidence of PW-1 and others and also when preparing for Judgment by this court. Ex.P10 to 13 are pertaining to same videos. In other words, videos found in Ex.P10 to 13 are all one and the same. In Ex.P11 though the Accused No.1 was seen pointing out his finger at CW- 1, but the voice was not recorded in the CC Cameras that were installed in the Police Station. PW-1 has deposed that there was no voice recording provision during those days. Further, before the Accused No.1 pointed out finger at CW-1, it was CW-1 who first pointed out finger at the Accused No.1 who came inside the Chamber. It is seen that both the Accused No.1 and CW-1 were conversing to each other and were approaching each other during the conversation.
21. Ex.P25 to 28 are the DVDs pertaining to the video that was recorded by CW-10 in the handy-cam. The same is also 20 CC.No.14002/2022 played in the open court and also when preparing for Judgment by this court. Here, also in all the four DVDs the videos are one and the same. In the videos found in these DVDs, in the first Video, CW-1 is seen examining the Accused persons of Cr.No.95/2020, in the Second Video the Accused No.1 is seen conversing with CW-1, but the words alleged to have been uttered by the Accused No.1 by the witnesses of the prosecution is not at all finding place in the said video. In the other Two Videos group of people were seen surrounding CW-1 and Accused No.1 and it is also seen that people in the crowd were talking to each other. The words alleged to have been uttered by the Accused No.1 targeting CW-1 is also not heard in those videos. As such, the the digital evidence produced by the prosecution is not at all helpful to prove the guilt of the Accused Persons.
22. From the oral evidence of PW-1 and 6 to 8, the prosecution is also not able to prove that the Accused have formed unlawful assembly with common object of committing an offence, though the Accused No.1 to 5 have entered the Police Station in a group. Just because, the Accused Persons have entered the Police Station, one after the other that itself will not 21 CC.No.14002/2022 amount to unlawful assembly or being members of such assembly. The evidence of the prosecution both oral and documentary is not sufficient to say that the Accused have formed unlawful assembly to commit an offence as alleged by the prosecution. Even, the prosecution witnesses have not deposed much about other Accused Persons expect deposing about Accused No.1. Though, the prosecution witnesses have deposed about the commission of the alleged offence by other Accused Persons, in the videos produced by the prosecution, the same is not seen as projected by the prosecution.
23. The prosecution has examined the spot mahazar witnesses as PW-4 and 5 and the DVD seizure mahazar witnesses as PW-2 and 3. They have deposed accordingly. CW-8 who is said to be one of the eye-witnesses has received the complaint from CW-1 and registered the case against the Accused Persons and forwarded the FIR to the Jurisdictional Court. The FIR is marked as Ex.P19. Finally, the I.O is examined as PW-10. He has deposed about receiving the case papers from CW-8 and conducting the investigation and filing charge sheet against the Accused Persons. It is the allegation of the 22 CC.No.14002/2022 prosecution that during the course of investigation CW-23/PW-10 had issued notice to the Accused No.1 to produce the Vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-03-MW-8181 which was used for commission of the offence. But, they have not produced the same, but they have hidden the vehicle somewhere else. The I.O who is examined as PW-10 has deposed that after issuance of notice to the Accused No.1, he went to the house of Accused No.1 along with panchas and visited the parking slot which is shown by one Sanganna Basappa who was present in the house of Accused No.1 and he drew a mahazar at the spot. He has deposed that except the above referred vehicle some other vehicles were parked in the said area.
24. On these allegations, the Accused No.1 is charge sheeted for the offence under Section 201 and 174 of IPC, which reads as follows:
"174. Non-attendance in obedience to an order from public servant.- Whoever, being legally bound to attend in person or by an agent at a certain place and time in obedience to a summons, notice, order or proclamation proceeding from any public servant legally competent, as such public servant, to issue the same, intentionally 23 CC.No.14002/2022 omits to attend at that place or time, or departs from the place where he is bound to attend before the time at which it is lawful for him to depart, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both, or, if the summons, notice, order or proclamation is to attend in person or by agent in a Court of Justice, with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both."
201. Causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender.-
Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, causes any evidence of the commission of that offence to disappear, with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment, or with that intention gives any infor-mation respecting the offence which he knows or believes to be false;....."
24 CC.No.14002/2022
25. In the case on hand, the notice issued to the Accused No.1 is not to appear before the I.O in person, but to produce the vehicle that is said to have been used for commission of the offence. The said notice is marked as Ex.P38. On perusal of the said document no date, time and place is mentioned in the notice for appearance of the Accused. On the other hand, the Accused No.1 was directed to produce the vehicle only. As such, section 174 of IPC, is not at all applicable to the case on hand. In other words, it can be safely said that the Accused No.1 has not at all committed the offence under Section 174 of IPC.
26. Next coming to Section 201 of IPC, though, it is the case of the prosecution that the Accused Persons have come to the Police Station in the vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-03- MW-8181 which is allegedly belonging to the Accused No.1, the same is not used for commission of the offence. The vehicle of the Accused No.1 has no role to play in the alleged offence. Further, there is no concealment of the vehicle also as provided under Section 201 of IPC. As such, without any hesitation, it can be safely said that the Accused No.1 cannot be convicted for the alleged offence under Section 201 of IPC also. 25 CC.No.14002/2022
27. Based on the discussions made above and also the available evidence before this court, this court cannot come to the conclusion that the Accused have commuted the offenece under Section 143, 147, 353, 504, 506, 174 and 201 R/w section 149 of IPC, as projected by the prosecution. The prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the Accused Persons beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, the benefit of doubt shall be extended infavour of the Accused Persons. Accordingly, Points No.1 to 6 are answered in the NEGATIVE.
28. Point No.7:- In view of my findings given on Points No.1 to 6, I proceed to pass the following :
ORDER Acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., the Accused No. 1 to 5 are acquitted of the offences punishable under section 143, 147, 353, 504, 506, 174 and 201, R/w. section 149 of IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond of the Accused 1 to 5 shall stand cancelled.
(Typed by me, directly on the computer, corrected and then pronounced by me, in th open court on this the 13 day of March - 2024).
Digitally signed
PREETH by PREETH J
J Date: 2024.03.19
15:18:38 +0530
(Preeth. J)
XLII Addl. CMM
(Special Court for trial of cases filed against sitting as 26 CC.No.14002/2022 well as former MPs/MLAs, triable by Magistrate in the State of Karnataka) ANNEXURES Witnesses examined for the Prosecution:-
PW.01 : Ayyanagouda V. Patil, PW.02 : Jagadish Hulagejji, PW.03 : Anand Badi, PW.04 : Iranagouda, PW.05 : Siddarth, PW.06 : S.B.Patil, PW.07 : Basavaraja Thipparaddi, PW.08 : R.S.Doni, PW.09 : Arjun, PW.10 : N.N.Ambiger.
Documents exhibited for the Prosecution:-
Ex.P.01 : Complaint,
Ex.P.01(a) : Signature of PW.01,
Ex.P.01(b) : Signature of PW.06,
Ex.P.02 : Spot Mahazar,
Ex.P.02(a) : Signature of PW.01,
Ex.P.02(b) : Signature of PW.04,
Ex.P.02(c) : Signature of PW.05,
Ex.P.02(d) : Signature of PW.10,
Ex.P.03 : Photo,
Ex.P.04 : Photo,
Ex.P.05 : Photo,
Ex.P.06 : Photo,
Ex.P.07 : Seizure Mahazar,
Ex.P.07(a) : Signature of PW.01,
Ex.P.07(b) : Signature of PW.02,
Ex.P.07(c) : Signature of PW.03,
Ex.P.07(d) : Signature of PW.09,
Ex.P.07(e) : Signature of PW.10,
Ex.P.08 : Photo,
Ex.P.09 : Photo,
Ex.P.10 : DVD,
Ex.P.11 : DVD,
Ex.P.12 : DVD,
27 CC.No.14002/2022
Ex.P.13 : DVD,
Ex.P.14 : Seizure Mahazar,
Ex.P.14(a) : Signature of PW.02,
Ex.P.14(b) : Signature of PW.03,
Ex.P.14(c) : Signature of PW.09,
Ex.P.14(d) : Signature of PW.10,
Ex.P.15 : Photo,
Ex.P.16 : Photo,
Ex.P.17 : Notice,
Ex.P.18 : Notice,
Ex.P.19 : FIR,
Ex.P.19(a) : Signature of PW.06,
Ex.P.20 : Notice,
Ex.P.21 : Notice,
Ex.P.22 : Notice,
Ex.P.23 : NISA Delivery Challan,
Ex.P.24 : Certificate u/s.65-B,
Ex.P.24(a) : Signature of PW.09,
Ex.P.25 : CD,
Ex.P.26 : CD,
Ex.P.27 : CD,
Ex.P.28 : CD,
Ex.P.29 : Certificate u/s.65-B,
Ex.P.29(a) : Signature of PW.09,
Ex.P.30 : Form No. 29,
Ex.P.31 : Form No. 29,
Ex.P.32 : Police Notice,
Ex.P.33 : Police Notice,
Ex.P.34 : Police Notice,
Ex.P.35 : Police Notice,
Ex.P.36 : Station House Diary,
Ex.P.37 : FIR in Cr.No.58/04,
Ex.P.38 : Police Notice,
Ex.P.39 : Police Notice,
Ex.P.40 : Spot Mahazar,
Ex.P.40(a) : Signature of PW.10,
Ex.P.41 : Rough Sketch,
Ex.P.42 : Photo,
Ex.P.43 : Photo.
Material object exhibited for the Prosecution: - 28 CC.No.14002/2022
- NIL -
Witnesses examined for the defence Accused:-
- NIL -
Documents exhibited for the defence Accused:-
- NIL -Digitally signed
PREETH by PREETH J Date:
J 2024.03.19
15:18:51 +0530
(Preeth. J)
XLII Addl. CMM
(Special Court for trial of cases filed against sitting as well as former MPs/MLAs, triable by Magistrate in the State of Karnataka) 29 CC.No.14002/2022