Bangalore District Court
State By J.P. Nagar Police Station vs Satish @ Kadupapa on 18 August, 2018
IN THE COURT OF THE 44TH ADDL.CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 18th day of AUGUST 2018
:Present:
Smt. Mala N.D., B.A.L., LL.B.,
44th ACMM, Bengaluru
C.C.No.750/2013
Complainant : State by J.P. Nagar Police station
(By Sr. Asst. Public Prosecutor)
-V/s-
Accused : 1. Satish @ Kadupapa,
S/o Late. Shankara,
Aged about 28 years,
R/at 5th Cross,
Andhrahalli, Kalika Nagar,
Peenya II Stage, Bengaluru.
(Case against accused No.4 is split up)
(A.2 is a child conflicting with law,
hence, referred to J.J. Board)
(A.3 pleaded guilty)
(Represented by Sri. Ravi Kumar.S.L.
advocate )
JUDGMENT
The PSI of J.P. Nagar Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused No.1 to 4 for the offence punishable U/s. 379 of IPC. 2 C.C. No.750/2013
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
It is alleged that, on 05/08/2011, at about 10 a.m. in the morning, C.W. 1 Sri. Sridhar Joshi had been to Shanthi Sagar Self Service Hotel, situated at 24th Main Road, J.P. Nagar, Bengaluru, within the limits of J.P. Nagar police station, to have breakfast. Complainant had kept his bag containing three gold chain and three gold rings on the table and went to take token, by that time, accused persons without knowledge of complainant, committed theft of his bag along with gold ornaments worth Rs.1,25,000/- and thereby committed aforesaid offence. Therefore, C.W.1 Sri. Sridhar Joshi has lodged complaint before the jurisdictional police. As such, this case came to be registered against accused persons. Thereafter, I.O. visited the place of incident, drawn spot mahazar as well as seizure mahazar, seized the articles involved in this case, recorded the statement of witnesses and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against accused persons for the aforesaid offence.
3. The accused No.1 is on bail and he is represented through his counsel. In spite of sufficient efforts, accused No.4 is not secured before this court. Hence, case against him is split up. Accused No.3 has pleaded his guilt on 24/06/2016. Case against 3 C.C. No.750/2013 accused No.2 is pending before J.J. Board.
4. The copies of the prosecution papers have been furnished to the accused No.1 as required under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. The cognizance of the offence punishable U/sec. 379 of IPC has been taken as per Sec.190 of Cr.P.C.
5. The charge is framed, contents of charge have been read over and explained to the accused No.1 in the language known to him, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the prosecution is called upon to prove its case.
6. Though, the prosecution in order to prove its case has cited as many as 13 witnesses, except C.W. 13, 5 and 12 none of the witnesses i.e. C.W. 1 to 4, 6 to 11 and 13 have turned up before the court inspite of taking coercive steps like issuance of summons and warrants. It is to be observed that, the charge is framed in the year 2014 and till now C.W. 1 to 4, 6 to 11 and 13 have been secured and no satisfactory explanation has been offered. Therefore, by considering the long standing pendency of the case, they have been discharged from deposing evidence.
7. After completion of prosecution side evidence, the statement of accused No.1 as required under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. has been 4 C.C. No.750/2013 recorded, wherein he has denied the incriminating evidence adduced against him and he has not chosen to lead his side defense evidence. Hence, the case is posted for arguments.
8. Heard both the side and perused the material evidence on record.
9. The following points would arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on 05/08/2011, at about
10 a.m. in the morning, C.W. 1 Sri. Sridhar Joshi had been to Shanthi Sagar Self Service Hotel, situated at 24th Main Road, J.P. Nagar, Bengaluru, within the limits of J.P. Nagar police station, to have breakfast. Complainant had kept his bag containing three gold chain and three gold rings on the table and went to take token, by that time, accused persons without knowledge of complainant, committed theft of his bag along with gold ornaments worth Rs.1,25,000/- and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC?
2. What Order?
10. My findings on the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : IN THE NEGATIVE Point No.2 : As per final order for the following 5 C.C. No.750/2013 REASONS
11. Point No.1: In this case, accused has been alleged of committing theft of bag containing three gold chain and three gold rings worth Rs.1,25,000/-, belonging to C.W. 1 Sri. Sridhar Joshi.
12. The complainant is one Sri. Sridhar Joshi who has set the law into motion has failed to appear before the court to put forth his case against accused No.1, which is a fatal blow to the prosecution case.
13. One official witness is examined as P.W. 1, wherein he has deposed about registering the complaint, forwarding FIR to the higher authorities as well as to the Court and handing over the case file to I.O. Sri. B.S. Angadi for further investigation, which is not of much important in the absence of material evidence of complainant and other independent witnesses.
14. In addition, two mahazar witnesses are examined as P.W. 2 and 3, wherein they have totally turned hostile, not deposed anything against accused No.1 and thereby not supported the case of prosecution. On the other hand, they have only identified their respective signatures on the mahazars by pleading their ignorance about its contents. As such, nothing substantial has been elicited in their cross-examination. Under the circumstances, this court cannot 6 C.C. No.750/2013 hold accused No.1 as guilty minded.
15. Moreover, though the prosecution has cited as many as 13 witnesses, except C.W. 13, 5 and 12 none of the witnesses i.e. C.W. 1 to 4, 6 to 11 and 13 have turned up before the court inspite of taking coercive steps like issuance of summons and warrants . It is to be observed that, on 10/11/2014 this court has framed charge and this court has extended fullest assistance to secure the witnesses by issuing summons and warrants which can be seen from the order sheet. Therefore, by considering the long standing pendency of the case, they have been discharged from deposing the evidence. As such, the prosecution has failed to prove its case against accused No.1 beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, benefit of doubt has to be extended in favour of accused No.1. As a result, the prosecution has failed to prove the charges leveled against accused No.1 with cogent, convincing and corroborative evidence. Therefore, above point No.1 is answered in the Negative.
16.Point No.2: In view of the negative findings on the above point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:- 7 C.C. No.750/2013
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 is found not guilty and acquitted of the offence punishable U/s. 379 of IPC.
The bail & bail bond of the accused No.1 and surety shall stands cancelled. Interim custody of item No.21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29 and 30 seized and subjected under P.F. No.253/2012, to the applicant is made absolute.
(Dictated to the Stenographer through computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 18 th day of August 2018).
(Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION P.W. 1: K.T. Chandrappa P.W. 2: Somashekar P.W. 3: Rangappa
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex.P. 1 : Statement of P.W. 1 Ex.P.1(a) : Signature of P.W. 1 Ex.P. 2 : FIR Ex.P.2(a) : Signature of P.W. 1 Ex.P.3 : Seizure mahazar Ex.P.3(a) : Signature of P.W. 2 Ex.P.4 : Seizure mahazar Ex.P.4(a) : Signature of P.W. 3
3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE NIL
4. LIST OF THE METERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION NIL (Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.8 C.C. No.750/2013
Judgment pronounced in Open
Court vide separate:-
ORDER
Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 is found not guilty and acquitted of the offence punishable U/s. 379 of IPC.
The bail & bail bond of the accused No.1 and surety shall stands cancelled.
Interim custody of item No.21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29 and 30 seized and subjected under P.F. No.253/2012, to the applicant is made absolute.
(Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
9 C.C. No.750/2013