Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

State By Channammanakere Achuchukattu vs In 1 Prasad G. @ Kulla on 4 February, 2015

     IN THE COURT OF THE FAST TRACK COURT-XIV,
                       BANGALORE CITY.

         Dated this the 17th day of February 2014
PRESENT: Sri. Shivaji Anant Nalwade, B.Com., LL.B.(Spl)
         Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-XIV,
         Bangalore City.
     SESSIONS CASE Nos.331/2013 AND 1380/2013

COMPLAINANT        -    State by Channammanakere Achuchukattu
                        Police
                        (By Learned Public Prosecutor)
                              - Vs -
ACCUSED in         1    Prasad G. @ Kulla, S/o.Gangadhara,
S.C.331/2013            20 yrs, R/at.No.4, 3rd Cross, Ashoka
                        Nagar, Bangalore-50.

                   2    R.Madan @ Madhu, S/o.Rudresh, 19
                        yrs, R/at. No.212/6, 2nd Main, 2nd
                        Block,     S.V.Road,     R.T.Nagar,
                        Bangalore-28.
                   3    Karthik @ Gonne, S/o.Late Basappa,
                        22 yrs, R/at. No.390, Hosa Road,
                        Behind Blue Bell School, 14th Cross,
                        Bangalore-100.
                   4
                        P.Siddartha @ Siddu, S/o. Late
                        Parthasarathy, 20 yrs, R/at.No.202,
                        1st Main, 1st Cross, Gururaja Layout,
                        Banashankari         3rd       Stage,
                   5    Bangalore-85.

                        C.S.Hemanth, S/o.Satish, 21 yrs,
                        R/at. No.45, Ayappa Temple Road,
                        C.K.Achuchukattu, Banashankari 3rd
                        Stage, Bangalore-85.
                        (By Sri.T.G.M. for A1 & A2 and
                        Sri.MKK for A3 to 5)
  Accused in       6    Sunami @ Arun kumar, s/o. Rajanna, 23
S.C.1380/2013           yrs, r/at No.123, 2nd main, 2nd cross,
                               2
                                            S.C.No.331/2013
                                          AND S.C.1380/2013


                      R.K.Badavane, Thyagaraja Nagar,
                      Bangalore.
                      (By Sri.H.M.T. Advocate)
1.   Date of commission of offence         20-11-2012

2.   Date of report of occurrence          20-11-2012

3.   Date of arrest of A-1                 21-11-2012
     Date of release of A-1                05-12-2012
     Period undergone in custody by A-1    0Y 0M 14 days




4.   Date of arrest of A-2                 21-11-2012
     Date of release of A-2                04-12-2012
     Period undergone in custody by A-2    0Y 0M 13 days




5.   Date of arrest of A-3                 21-11-2012
     Date of release of A-3                04-12-2012
     Period undergone in custody by A-3    0Y 0M 13 days




6.   Date of arrest of A-4                 21-11-2012
     Date of release of A-4                04-12-2012
     Period undergone in custody by A-4    0Y 0M 13 days
                                      3
                                                    S.C.No.331/2013
                                                  AND S.C.1380/2013




    7.    Date of arrest of A-5                      21-11-2012
          Date of release of A-5                     04-12-2012
          Period undergone in custody by A-5         0Y 0M 13 days

    8.    Date of arrest of A-6 (B/W)                30-10-2013
          Date of release of A-6                     10-01-2014
          Period undergone in custody by A-6         0Y 2M 10 days

    9.    Date of commencement of evidence           17-10-2013
    10.   Date of closing of evidence                07-02-2014
    11.   Name of the complainant                    B.B.Mallur

    12.   Offences complained of                     Sec.399 and 402 IPC

    13.   Opinion of the Judge                       As per the final order

    14.   Order of sentence                          Offence not proved
                       COMMON JUDGMENT

1.        These cases are committed by the 2nd ACMM Court,
          Bangalore City, Bangalore to the Hon'ble Prl. City Civil and
          Sessions Court, Bangalore on the ground that offences
          punishable   under   section   399   and   402   of   IPC   are
          exclusively triable by the court of sessions.
.


2.        The Police Inspector Channammanakere Achuchukattu
          Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused No.1
          to 6 for the offences punishable under section 399 and 402
          of IPC arising out of Channammanakere Achuchukattu
          Police Station in Cr.NO.383/2012.


3.        The brief facts of the prosecution case is as under :
                            4
                                            S.C.No.331/2013
                                          AND S.C.1380/2013


        CW 1 on 20-11-2012 doing patrolling duty within the
limits of Channammanakere Achuchukattu Police Station
and when he was near Banagiri Water Tank at about 6.45
p.m., he received credible information to the effect that
5-6 persons have gathered in BBMP play ground armed
with deadly weapons prepared to commit dacoity of the
commuters. Thereafter he secured his staff and CW 2 and
3 pancha near the play ground.          Thereafter he informed
about the credible information to his staff and panchas. He
asked CW 6 and one of the pancha to go and hear the
conversions of the said persons and inform the same to
him, CW 3 and CW 6 went near the group of persons and
came back and told him that they are talking with each
other    regarding   committing    of    the   dacoity   of   the
commuters and he confirmed the credible information
which was received by him.        Thereafter he, his staff and
panchas have conducted the raid and catch hold 5 persons
one of the persons ran away from the places. Thereafter
he has searched the said persons and seized MO 1 to 9
articles by drawing mahazar thereafter he brought A1 to 5
and seized articles and prepared report as per Ex.P-3 and
register the same in Cr.No.383/2012 under section 399
and 402 of IPC and sent FIR to the court. Thereafter, he
recorded the statements of CW 2 to 8 and further handed
over further investigation to CW 9, CW 9 has filed charge
sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under
section 399 and 402 of IPC.
                                 5
                                               S.C.No.331/2013
                                             AND S.C.1380/2013


4.   After filing the charge sheet by the Investigating Officer, II
     ACMM Court is taken cognizance and registered the case in
     C.C.2382/2013.    II ACMM Court has secured presence of
     A1 to 5, A6 was absconding. So the court has splited the
     case against A6 and directed Investigating Officer to file

     separate charge sheet against A6.        Thereafter the 2nd
     ACMM Court furnished the charge sheet copy to A1 to 5 as
     contemplated under section 207 Cr.P.C. and committed
     the case to the Hon'ble Prl. City Civil and Sessions Court,
     Bangalore and that was registered as S.C.331/2013 and
     made over to this court for disposal according to law
     against A1 to 5 as the offence alleged are triable by the
     Sessions Court.


5.   After filing of the splitted charge sheet by the Investigating

     Officer against A6, 2nd ACMM Court has registered the
     case against A6 in C.C.2502/2013 and secured the
     presence of accused by issuing of body warrant as A6 was
     in judicial custody in other case, furnished the copy of the
     charge sheet to A6 as contemplated under section 207
     Cr.P.C. and thereafter committed the case against A6 to
     the Hon'ble Prl. City Civil & Sessions Court, Bangalore City
     and that case was registered as S.C.1380/2013 and made
     over to this court for disposal according to law.       After
     receipt of the records the presence of A1 to 6 were
     secured and they are released on bail. Now A1 to 6 are on
     bail.
                                     6
                                                     S.C.No.331/2013
                                                   AND S.C.1380/2013


6.   Thereafter heard learned counsel for the accused and
     learned Public Prosecutor for state on charge to be framed
     against accused.      The charge under 240 Cr.P.C. framed
     against accused for the offence punishable under section
     399 and 402 of IPC and read over the same to the accused
     in the open court.         The accused pleaded not guilty and
     claimed to be tried.       Thereafter the prosecution is called
     upon   to   prove    the     guilt   of    accused   by     examining
     prosecution witness. The prosecution in order to prove the
     guilty of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt in all
     examined six witnesses as PW 1 to 6 and got marked 6
     documents as per Ex.P-1 to 6 and marked 9 material
     objects as MO 1 to 9 and closed its side.                 Thereafter
     accused are examined under section 313 Cr.P.C. to unable
     them to explain incriminating circumstances appearing
     against them in the prosecution evidence. Accused denied
     the statement in toto and further stated that they have no
     defence evidence and they have nothing to say thereafter
     the case is posted for arguments.


7.   Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for
     the accused and learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of the
     state in length.


8.   The points that arise for my determination are :
       1.     Whether       the      prosecution      proves       beyond
              reasonable doubt that A1 to 6 on 20-11-2012 at
              about      7.00     p.m.,    at    BBMP     play     ground,
              Manjunatha Colony, Banashankari III Stage within
                                       7
                                                      S.C.No.331/2013
                                                    AND S.C.1380/2013


              the     limits    of    Channamanakere        Achuchukattu
              Police Station assembled with deadly weapons for
              the purpose of committing dacoity and thereby
              committed the offence punishable under section
              402 of IPC?
        2.    Whether          the     prosecution       proves    beyond
              reasonable doubt that accused on the above said
              date,    time     and       place   made    preparation   for
              committing dacoity and thereby committed the
              offence punishable under section 399 of IPC?
        3.    What order?


9.    My findings on the above points are as follows :
      Point No.1         :          In the Negative
      Point No.2         :          In the Negative
      Point No.3         :          As per final order for the following
                             REASONS
10.   POINT No.1 AND 2          :    The above points are connected,
      hence they are taken up together for discussion together.
      It is the case of the prosecution that the accused have
      committed the offence punishable under section 399 and
      402 of IPC and in order to prove the guilt of the accused
      the prosecution in all examined six witnesses and they are
      PW 1 Siddegowda son of Boregowda, P.C., PW 2 Vinod
      Kumar, son of Krishna murthy, pancha on spot cum
      seizure mahazar, PW 3 Ramappa, son of Bheemappa, PSI
      (complainant),    PW      4    B.K.Kumar,     son    of   Krishnaiah,
      pancha, spot cum seizure mahazar, PW 5 Shivakumar, son
      of Boraiah HC, PW 6 Kambaiah, son of Ramaiah, ASI.
                                  8
                                                S.C.No.331/2013
                                              AND S.C.1380/2013




11.   The prosecution in order to prove guilt of the accused in all
      got marked 6 documents and they are Ex.P-1 spot
      mahazar, Ex.P-2 portion of statement of PW 2, Ex.P-3
      complaint, Ex.P-4 FIR, Ex.P-5 P.F.NO.177/2012, Ex.P-6
      portion of statement of PW 4 and prosecution got marked
      9 Material Object    they are MO 1 dragger, MO 2 Sansui
      mobile, MO 3 Max mobile, MO 4 chopper, MO 5 China set
      mobile, MO 6 iron pipe, MO 7 iron pipe, MO 8 iron pipe and
      MO 9 Nokia mobile.


12.   The perusal of the complaint which is at Ex.P-3 discloses
      that   incident   took   place   on   20-11-2012   and      the
      complainant has lodged the complaint immediately at 8.30
      p.m., so there is no abnormal delay on the part of the
      complainant in lodging the complaint. The perusal of the
      FIR discloses that police have submitted FIR to the court
      on 21-11-2012 at 11.00 a.m., i.e., within 24 hours from
      the registration of the case. So there is no abnormal delay
      on the part of the police in submitting FIR to the court.


13.   The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused
      examined PW 1, PW 1 in his evidence stated that since last
      7 years he is working as P.C. at Channamana kere
      Achuchukattur police station on 20-11-2012 at about 6.45
      p.m., CW 1 informed him over the phone that 5-6 persons
      have gathered near BBMP office of Channamana kere
      Achuchukattur with dangerous weapons in order to commit
      daocity and asked him to come to that place along with
                          9
                                       S.C.No.331/2013
                                     AND S.C.1380/2013


ASI Kambaiah who was also on patrolling duty at that time
in Banagiri, after receiving the phone call with 5 minutes
he and ASI Kambaiah went to the spot, P.C. Shivakumar,
Nanjundaswamy,       Srinivas    pancha      by     name
Hemanthakumar and Vinod kumar and complainant were
present there. The complainant told him that 5-6 persons
have gathered near BBMP office ground for committing
daocity and sent him and one pancha Vinod Kumar to go
to the said place where the persons have gathered and to
hear their conversation regarding the information received
and thereafter he and pancha Vinod Kumar went there and
by staying away from the said persons gathered the
information, they saw the persons with armed with longs,
dragger, pipe, chopper etc., and they were talking that
they have to loot the commuters going in the road and he
confirmed that they have gathered there in order to
commit dacoity and he and pancha came back and
informed the same to complainant and thereafter they
surrounded the said persons and raided them and out of 6
persons one person ran away and they have catch hold 5
persons he catch hold A3 Karthik and he was having an
iron pipe complainant catch hold Madan and he was having
one dragger and two mobile phones ASI Kambaiah catch
hold A1 he was having chopper, P.C. Shivakumar caught
hold A4 and he was having iron pipe P.C. Nanjundaswamy
apprehended A5 and he was having iron pipe and one
Nokia mobile with him when they enquired they told the
name of the person who ran away as Sansui, complainant
has drawn mahazar in presence of panchas and seized MO
                                 10
                                                  S.C.No.331/2013
                                                AND S.C.1380/2013


      1 to 9 articles and they have brought the accused persons
      and MO 1 to 9 to the police station and the complainant
      has lodged the complaint and registered the case against
      the accused.    This witness has been cross examined by
      counsel for the accused and this witness in his cross
      examination stated that Banagiri situated at a distance of
      half a kilometer from the police station and further stated
      that after the receipt of the information he and ASI
      Kambaiah went directly to the spot and when they reached
      the said place time was 6.45 p.m. Further this witness has
      admitted that on the spot street lights are there and spot
      is in the park and public will come there for walking.


14.   The prosecution examined PW 2 and 4 and they are the
      spot and seizure mahazar panchas who have accompanied
      the complainant and his officials for raid and they in their
      evidence have stated that police have not called for raid,
      police have not conducted any raid in their presence and
      not catch hold the accused persons and not seized MO 1 to
      8 articles in their presence. The prosecution treated them
      hostile cross-examined and nothing has been made out in
      their cross-examination so as to help the prosecution to
      prove the drawing of spot cum seizure mahazar and
      seizure mahazar of MO 1 to 9 articles.


15.   The prosecution examined PW 3. He in his evidence stated
      that   since   06-07-2011      he   is   working    as   PSI   at
      Channamana      kere   Achuchukattur       police   station    on
      20-11-2012 he was doing patrolling duty within the limits
                         11
                                       S.C.No.331/2013
                                     AND S.C.1380/2013


of his police station and when he was near Banagiri water
tank road at about 6.30 p.m., he received credible
information to the effect that 5-6 persons gathered in
BBMP play ground, Manjunatha Colony armed with deadly
weapons prepared to commit daocity of the commuters he
secured his staff and panchas near the play ground and
informed them regarding the information received by him.
He told CW 3 and 6 to go near the ground where the said
person assembled and hear their conversions and inform
regarding what they are doing there.   CW 3 and 6 went
there and gathered information and told that the said
persons are holding deadly weapons like chopper, dragger
and they are making preparation to commit dacoity and
thereafter he, his staff and panchas raided the said
persons and catch hold them one person ran away, he
caught hold A2 and he was possessing the dragger in his
hand and two mobile phones, ASI Kambaiah catch hold A1
and he was having iron pipe and one china set mobile, P.C.
Siddegowda caught hold A3 he was having iron pipe, P.C.
Shivakumar caught hold A4 he was having iron pipe in his
hand. P.C. Nanjundaswamy caught hold A5 he was having
iron pipe and nokia mobile. They came to know that name
of the person who ran away is Sunami.       Thereafter he
drawn mahazar in presence of panchas as per Ex.P-1 and
seized MO 1 to 9 articles and he brought accused persons
and properties to the police station and he lodged the
complaint and registered the case against accused and
identified the accused persons arrested by him and also
identified the person ran away on that day i.e., A6. This
                                  12
                                              S.C.No.331/2013
                                            AND S.C.1380/2013


      witness has been cross-examined by the counsel for the
      accused. This witness admitted that spot of incident is a
      public park and in the said park since 4 p.m., till 8 p.m.,
      general public are walking there.     Further this witness
      admitted that by the side of the park the public road is
      there which leads to Vidyapeeta circle.   This witness has
      stated that he is unable to say which type of the dress the
      accused were worn on that day he cannot say colour of the
      dress worn by them.


16.   The prosecution examined PW 5, in his evidence has
      stated that he worked as P.C. at Channamanakere
      Achuchukattu police station from the year 2006 to 2013,
      on 20-11-2013 he CW 6 and 8 were on patrolling duty at
      Channamanakere Achuchukattu Manjunatha Colony. CW 1
      informed them that he received credible information about
      preparation of dacoity by some persons and he told them
      and   two   panchas   to    come   near   Channamanakere
      Achuchukattu BBMP ground, Manjunatha Colony.         CW 1
      sent CW 6 and one pancha for observing the conversions
      of the person sitting inside the ground CW 6 went there
      and told that said persons are making preparation for
      dacoity of the commuters by holding deadly weapons and
      thereafter they have caught hold 5 persons, one person
      ran away and they have seized MO 1 to 9 from them
      brought the accused persons and the property to the police
      station and complainant has lodged the complaint.      This
      witness has been cross-examined by the counsel for the
      accused and this witness has stated that he received the
                                13
                                               S.C.No.331/2013
                                             AND S.C.1380/2013


      information at 6.45 p.m., when he was on patrolling duty.
      Further this witness has stated that when he received the
      information CW 5, 6, 7 were along with him which is
      contrary to the evidence of PW 1.     PW 1 in his evidence
      has stated that when information came to him he and ASI
      Kambaiah were on patrolling duty and when he reached
      the spot, other officials and panchas were near the spot
      which is contrary to the evidence of this witness.


17.   The prosecution examined PW 6, PW 6 in his evidence
      stated that since last 3 years he is working as ASI at
      Channamanakere       Achuchukattu     police   station   on
      20-11-2012 at 6.45 p.m., he CW 4 to 7 were on patrolling
      duty at that time CW 1 informed them that at BBMP play
      ground 5-6 persons are making preparation for committing
      dacoity by holding dangerous weapons in their hands and
      they went there and CW 1 sent one pancha and CW 4 for
      hearing conversation of the said persons and they went
      and heard the conversation and told that the said persons
      are making preparation of dacoity by holding dangerous
      weapons with them and thereafter they have caught hold
      the said persons and seized MO 1 to 9 articles from them.
      This witness has given contrary statement to that of
      prosecution case stated that CW 1 sent CW 4 and one
      pancha. Whereas it is the case of the prosecution that CW
      1 sent CW 6 and one pancha for hearing the conversation.
                                     14
                                                      S.C.No.331/2013
                                                    AND S.C.1380/2013


18.   It   is   the   specific   case    of   the   accused    during   the
      cross-examination of prosecution witnesses that they have
      not committed any offence as alleged against them false
      case is registered against them only in order to show some
      statistics to the superiors.        It is the further case of the
      accused persons that accused No.3 has filed the complaint
      against A1 and 2 regarding galata in the Channamanakere
      Achuchukattu police station and the police have not
      registered the case as per his complaint and got involved
      them in this case. In the present case PW 1, 3 and 5 in
      their evidence admitted that spot incident is in the public
      place and public are available since 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. there.
      Further they have admitted that nearby the spot public
      road is there and gymnastic center is there and the said
      center opens since morning till 9 p.m. and general public
      are available in the said center. In the present case both
      panchas witness cited and examined the prosecution who
      alleged to have been accompanied the police officials for
      raid have turned hostile.          Investigating Officer has not
      cited the independent witness who are easily available on
      the spot and not given any explanation for non citing and
      non examining the independent witness.                  Further it is
      specific case of the accused that PW 1, 5 and 6 who are
      the sub-ordinates officials of PW 3 are giving false
      evidence against them only as per the say of PW 3. It is
      the case of the accused that they have been falsely
      implicated by PW 3 in this case and sub-ordinates of PW 3
      are giving false evidence against them.            In the present
      case PW 5 and 6 have stated that CW 4 to 6 were on
                                 15
                                              S.C.No.331/2013
                                            AND S.C.1380/2013


      patrolling duty whereas PW 1 has stated that he and ASI
      Kambaiah were on patrolling duty. There is contradictions
      in the evidence of official of witnesses said contradictions
      is material one. So only evidence of the official evidence
      will not prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable
      doubt.   As per the well settled principles of criminal law
      benefit of doubt goes to the accused, in present case
      giving the benefit of doubt to the accused I hold that
      prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond
      reasonable doubt.     Hence, for the above discussion, I
      answer point No.1 and 2 in the NEGATIVE.


19.   POINT No.3 : In view of my findings point No.1 and 2 and
      reasons stated there, I proceed to pass the following :
                            ORDER

Acting under section 235(1) Cr.P.C. accused No.1 to 6 are acquitted for the offence punishable under section 399 and 4-02 of IPC.

Bail bonds of the accused stands cancelled forthwith.

MO 1 to 9 articles are confiscated to the state after the appeal period is over.

Kept the original judgment in S.C.331/2013 and copy in S.C.1380/2013.

(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 17th day of February 2014).

16

S.C.No.331/2013 AND S.C.1380/2013 (SHIVAJI ANANT NALWADE) Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-XIV, Bangalore City.

---

ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the prosecution:

Pw.1 Siddegowda Cw.6 17-10-2013 Pw.2 Vinod Kumar Cw.3 03-01-2014 Pw.3 Barmappa B Mallur Cw.1 "
Pw.4 B.K.Kumara Cw.2 01-02-2014 Pw.5 Shivakumar Cw.4 "

Pw.6 Kambaiah Cw.8 07-02-2014 Documents marked for the prosecution:

Ex.P1 Spot mahazar Pw.1 17-10-2013 Ex.P1a Signature of Pw.2 Pw.2 03-01-2014 Ex.P1b Signature of Pw.3 Pw.3 03-01-2014 Ex.P1c Signature of Pw.4 Pw.4 01-02-2014 Ex.P2 161 St. of Pw.2 Pw.2 03-01-2014 Ex.P3 Complaint Pw.3 "
Ex.P3a Signature of Pw.3 " "
Ex.P4       FIR                           "             "
Ex.P4a      Signature of Pw.3             "             "
Ex.P5       P.F. No.177/2012             Pw.3           "
Ex.P5a      Signature of Pw.3             "             "
Ex.P6       161 Further St. of Pw.4      Pw.4      01-02-2014

Material objects marked for the prosecution: MO.1 One dragger Pw.1 17-10-2013 MO.2 One Samsui mobile Pw.1 17-10-2013 MO.3 One max mobile Pw.1 17-10-2013 MO.4 One iron chopper Pw.1 17-10-2013 MO.5 One iron pipe Pw.1 17-10-2013 1MO.6 One iron pipe Pw.1 17-10-2013 MO.7 One iron pipe Pw.1 17-10-2013 MO.8 One iron pipe Pw.1 17-10-2013 MO.9 One nokia mobile Pw.1 17-10-2013 Witness examined, documents and material objects marked for the accused: 17 S.C.No.331/2013 AND S.C.1380/2013
- Nil -
Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-XIV, Bangalore City.
---
18
S.C.No.331/2013 AND S.C.1380/2013 COMMON JUDGEMENT PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT VIDE SEPARATE ORDER ORDER Acting under section 235(1) Cr.P.C. accused No.1 to 6 are acquitted for the offence punishable under section 399 and 4-02 of IPC.
Bail bonds of the accused stands cancelled forthwith.
MO 1 to 9 articles are confiscated to the state after the appeal period is over.
Kept the original judgment in S.C.331/2013 and copy in S.C.1380/2013.
Presiding Officer FTC-XIV, Bangalore.