Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Bangalore District Court

State By City Market Police Station vs No.1 Voluntarily Caused Hurt To C.W.1 ... on 12 May, 2015

  IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
            MAGISTRATE, AT BANGALORE.

                Dated this the 12th day of May 2015

         Present : Shri J.V.Vijayananda B.Com., LL.B
                   IX Addl.C.M.M.Bangalore.

            JUDGMENT UNDER SEC.355 OF Cr.P.C.

1.C.C.No.                  9140/2015

2.Date of Offence           30-9-2014

3.Complainant              State by City Market Police Station

4.Accused                  1. Sharath S/o late Gopala,
                              aged 22 years, Anjanappa Garden,
                              'C' Lane Mysore road, Bangalore

                           2. Mani @ Manimaran,
                              S/o Late Pasrama,
                              aged 22 years, No.854,
                              Government Quarters,
                              Pantharapalya, Nayandahalli,
                              Bangalore

5. Offences complained     Under Sections 341and  r/w 34
of                         of IPC.

6.Plea                     Accused Nos. 1 and 2 pleaded not
                           guilty.

7.Final Order              Accused Nos.1 and 2 are acquitted

8.Date of Order            12-4-2015

                          REASONS

     The Sub Inspector of Police, City Market Police Station,
Bangalore has filed this charge sheet against the accused
 2                                                   C.C.No.9140/2015


Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 341,
 r/w 34 of IPC.


       2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, on
30-9-2014 at 7-15 p.m., within the limits of City Market Police
Station in front of wine shop at G.P.Street, the accused Nos.1
and 2 with common intention picked up quarrel with C.W.1
Muthuraj in respect of money, abused him in filthy language
as bolimagane and thereby wrongfully restrained him and the
accused No.1 voluntarily caused hurt to C.W.1 with knife on
his right thigh and committed aforesaid offences.


       3. The accused No.1 is in judicial custody and accused
No.2 is on bail. On receipt of chargesheet, this court took
cognizance of the offences and furnished the copies of the
prosecution papers to the accused Nos.1 and 2. After hearing
on charges, this court framed the charge for the offences
punishable under Sections 341,  and  r/w 34 of IPC.,
and questioned the accused persons regarding the charge
made against them, they denied the charge and claimed to be
try.


       4.   The prosecution in order to prove its case got
examined only one witness the complainant and injured as
P.W.1 and got marked two documents at Exs.P1 and P2.



       5. Since, there is no incriminating evidence against the
accused persons, their statement under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C., is
dispensed with.
 3                                                     C.C.No.9140/2015


      6. I have heard the arguments on both sides.


      7. The prosecution to prove the guilt against the accused
Nos.1 and 2 has examined the complainant and only injured
witness by name Muthuraj as P.W.1.        The testimony of P.W.1
indicating that on 30-9-2014 at 7-15 p.m., when he was in
front of wine store at G.P.Street, City Market, the accused
persons came to said place and there was an exchange of
words between him and accused persons in respect of money.
But the accused persons have not wrongfully restrained him,
they have not abused in filthy language and they have not
caused any injuries with any object. In respect of exchange of
words, when he visited the Police Station and at that time, the
police obtained his signature, but he does not know the
contents of the complaint and he has not obtained any
treatment. Further, he has not given any further statement to
the police. Totally, P.W.1 has turned hostile.


      8.   The learned Sr.APP., treated this witness as hostile
and further cross-examined him, but nothing worth is elicited
from him. In the cross-examination, P.W.1 has admitted that
he and accused persons have compromised the matter outside
the   court.   Since    P.W.1    and   accused    persons       have
compromised the matter out side the court, that is the reason
why P.W.1 has not supported the case of the prosecution.


      9. I have carefully perused the charge sheet. P.W.1 is
the only material witness but he has not supported the case of
the   prosecution.     The   other   witnesses   on    record     are
 4                                                       C.C.No.9140/2015


eyewitnesses, mahazar witnesses, Investigating Officer and
Medical officer. In view of not supporting the case of the
prosecution by P.W.1, even if the prosecution had examined
other witnesses on record, no purpose would serve in proving
the guilt against the accused persons. Accordingly, by
rejecting the prayer of learned Sr.APP., examination of C.Ws.2
to 11 dropped. Therefore, having regard to the facts and
circumstances of the case and the evidence on record, I am of
the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove
the guilt against the accused Nos.1 and 2 beyond all
reasonable doubt.       Accordingly, accused Nos.1 and 2 are
entitled for benefit of doubt. In the result, I proceed to pass
the following:
                                  ORDER

This court did not found guilt of accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences under Sections 341, 324 and 504 r/w 34 of IPC.

Hence, acting under Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused Nos.1 and 2 have been acquitted for the above referred offences.

The bail bond and suety bond of accused No.2 stands cancelled.

Issue direction to jail authority to release the accused No.1 forth with if he is not required in any other case.

The property pertaining to this case i.e., knife is confiscated to Government after appeal period is over. (Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer and print out taken by her is verified and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 12th day of May 2015) (J.V.Vijayananda) IX Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.

ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:

P.W.1, Muthuraju;

LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1,      Complaint,
Ex.P1(a),   Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P2,      Statement;

LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION : NIL LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED, DOCUMENTS & MATERIALS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE: NIL IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bangalore.

Judgement pronounced in the open court vide separate sheet.

ORDER This court did not found guilt of accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences under Sections 341, 324 and 504 r/w 34 of IPC.

Hence, acting under Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused Nos.1 and 2 have been acquitted for the above referred offences.

The bail bond and suety bond of accused No.2 stands cancelled. Issue direction to jail authority to release the accused No.1 forth with if he is not required in any other case.

The property pertaining to this case i.e., knife is confiscated to Government after appeal period is over.

IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bangalore.