Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Bangalore District Court

The State By vs Shivashankar S/O Narayanappa on 27 November, 2021

  IN THE COURT OF VII ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITIAN
               MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.

          Dated this the 27th day of November, 2021.

          Present : Smt. Dhanalakshmi. R. B.Sc., LL.B.
                    VII Addl.C.M.M., Bengaluru.

                      C.C.No.8204/2012

Complainant      :   The State by
                     Amruthahalli Police Station.
                     (By Assistant Public Prosecutor)

                       V/s

Accused              Shivashankar S/o Narayanappa,
                     Age 24 years, R/at No.58/1,
                     Century Apartments Road,
                     Dasarahalli, Bengaluru.

Date of occurrence of offence      : 15.07.2011

Date of report of offence         : 15.07.2011

Date of arrest of Accused          : 16.07.2011

Name of the complainant           : K.Veeranna PSI,

Date of commencement of           : 05.07.2021.
recording evidence

Date of closing of evidence       : 17.11.2021.
                                2                  CC No. 8204 /2012


Offences complained of             : U/s CL 3 (B) of Kerosene
                                    (Restriction on Use and
                                    Fixation of Cealing prices)
                                    Amendment Order 1988 r/w
                                    Sec. 3 and 7 of E.C.Act and
                                    Sec.285 of IPC.

Opinion of the Judge               : Accused found not guilty.



                         JUDGMENT

The P.S.I. of Amruthahalli Police Station has filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/s CL 3 (B) of Kerosene (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Cealing prices) Amendment Order 1988 r/w Sec. 3 and 7 of E.C.Act and Sec.285 of IPC.

2. Brief case of the prosecution is as under :

On 15.07.2021 at about 2.15 p.m. within the jurisdiction of Amruthahalli Police Station, at No.59, Kuvempu Main Road, Kempapura Dasarahalli the accused was found in illegal possession of 150 (5x30) litres of Kerosene without any valid license and permit and he stored the same negligently without taking any proper measures and thereby alleged to have committed offences punishable U/s CL 3 (B) of Kerosene (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Cealing prices) Amendment Order 1988 r/w Sec. 3 and 7 of E.C.Act and Sec.285 of IPC.

3. Upon the written information given by the complainant crime was registered in Crime No.132/2011 and investigation was taken up. After the completion of the investigation, the charge­sheet was submitted against the accused person for the aforementioned offences. The cognizance of the offences U/s CL 3 (B) of Kerosene (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Cealing prices) Amendment Order 1988 r/w Sec.3 and 7 of E.C.Act and Sec.285 of IPC, is taken against accused person and registered the case.

4. In pursuance of the summons accused has appeared and he is on Court bail. The prosecution papers given to accused as required U/s. 207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, the charge is framed against the accused person for the offences punishable U/s CL 3 (B) of Kerosene (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Cealing prices) Amendment Order 1988 r/w Sec. 3 and 7 of E.C.Act and Sec.285 of IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.

5. The prosecution has examined P.W.1 to 4 and have got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.2 on its behalf. Inspite of issuing 4 CC No. 8204 /2012 proclamation to other witnesses, the prosecution has failed to secure them. Hence, other witnesses are dropped. On the closure, accused has been examined under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C. for the incriminating circumstances appeared against him. He denied the same and not chosen to adduce evidence on his behalf.

6. Heard both sides. Perused the documents placed on record.

7. The points that arise for consideration are as follows:

1. Whether the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that on 15.07.2021 at about 2.15 p.m. within the jurisdiction of Amruthahalli Police Station, at No.59, Kuvempu Main Road, Kempapura Dasarahalli the accused was found in illegal possession of 150 (5x30) litres of Kerosene without any valid license and permit and thereby committed an offence punishable U/s CL 3 (B) of Kerosene (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Cealing prices) Amendment Order 1988 r/w Sec. 3 and 7 of E.C.Act ?

2. Whether the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that on the same date, time and place the accused has stored 150 (5x30) litres of Kerosene negligently without taking any proper measures so as to endanger human life and thereby committed an offence punishable U/s 285 IPC ?

3. What order ?

8. This Court answers the above points as under :

Point No.1 : In the Negative.

Point No.2 : In the Negative.

Point No.3 : As per final order for the following :

REASONS

9. Point Nos.1 AND 2 : The offences alleged against the accused U/s CL 3 (B) of Kerosene (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Cealing prices) Amendment Order 1988 r/w 3 and 7 of E.C.Act and Sec.285 of IPC. The prosecution has examined the PW.1 to PW­4. PW­1 is the Mahazar witness. He has deposed that he does not know the accused person, at about 9 years back when he went to the police station, the police have obtained his signature on a document. He does not know the contents of the same. Further, deposed that the police have not seized any material objects in his presence. Further, deposed that he has not given any statement before the police. Hence, PW­1 turned hostile before the Court. Though, he was subjected to cross­examination by the prosecution nothing is elicited to prove the guilt of the accused person.

10. PW­2 is the Official witness has deposed that on 15.07.2011 at about 2.15 p.m. CW­1 has got information regarding illegal possession of the Kerosene at the shop of accused person situated at Kuvempu Main Road, Kempapura, Accordingly, he along with CW­5 and 6 went to the shop and found that accused has stored 30 litres of Kerosene each in 05 cans. Later, they have arrested the accused person and seized the properties and taken them to the police station. During his cross­examination he denied the questions put­forth to him.

11. PW­3 is another official witness who assisted PW­2 in the raid has deposed that on 15.07.2011 at about 2.15 p.m. CW­1 has got information regarding illegal possession of the Kerosene at the shop of accused person situated at Kuvempu Main Road, Kempapura, Accordingly, he along with CW­4 and 6 went to the shop and found that accused has stored 30 litres of Kerosene each in 05 cans. Later, they have arrested the accused person and seized the properties and taken them to the police station. During his cross­examination he denied the questions put­forth to him.

12. PW­4 is also an Official witness has deposed regarding handing over the seized properties to the FSL for scientific examination by obtaining passport and submitting report regarding the same. During his cross­ examination he denied the questions put­forth to him. It is to be seen that the prosecution has not examined the Complainant and Investigating Officer before this Court. The prosecution has failed to prove seizure of the material objects as per Ex.P­1 by examining the mahazar witnesses. Though the prosecution has examined one mahazar witness, he has turned hostile before the Court. The seizure of Kerosene from the possession of accused is not proved by the prosecution. Though PW­2 and 3 the official witnesses deposed regarding seizure of Kerosene from the accused their evidence is not corroborated by examining the independent witnesses. Hence, on the careful perusal of the entire oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution, it has failed to prove that accused was found in illegal possession of 150 (5x30) litres of Kerosene without any valid license and permit and he stored the same negligently without taking any proper measures, so as to endanger human life. On careful perusal of the entire evidence and the 8 CC No. 8204 /2012 documents produced by the prosecution, this Court comes to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the offence alleged against the accused person beyond reasonable doubt. Hence this Court answered above points in the negative.

13. Point Nos.3 : As per the reasons discussed in point Nos.1 and 2 the prosecution has failed to bring the home guilt of the offences alleged against accused persons U/s CL 3 (B) of Kerosene (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Cealing prices) Amendment Order 1988 r/w Sec.3 and 7 of E.C.Act and Sec.285 of IPC. As the accused persons denied the entire case of prosecution the burden is on the prosecution to prove its case. But on perusal of oral and documentary evidence, the prosecution has failed to prove its case. Hence this Court proceed to pass the following :

ORDER Acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/s CL 3 (B) of Kerosene (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Cealing prices) Amendment Order 1988 r/w Sec.3 and 7 of E.C.Act and Sec.285 of IPC.

              Bail     bonds      and       surety    shall    stand
          cancelled.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, directly on the computer typed by him, then corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this 27th day of November 2021.) (Smt. Dhanalakshmi.R) VII Addl.C.M.M., Bengaluru.

ANNEXURES List of witnesses examined for the Complainant :

PW.1 : Devaraju, PW.2 : Narasimha.R, PW.3 : Prasanna.D, PW.4 : Srinivas.K. List of documents marked for the Complainant :

Ex.P.1      : Spotmahazar,

Ex.P.1(a) : Signature.

Ex.P.2      : Statement.

List of witnesses examined for the Accused                :   NIL.

List of documents exhibited for the Accused :                  NIL.

List of Material Object marked for prosecution : NIL.

VII Addl.C.M.M.,Bengaluru.