Bangalore District Court
State By Halasuru Gate Police Station vs Nos.3 And 4 Are R/O No.185/ on 18 June, 2018
IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL.CMM: BENGALURU
Dated this the 18th day of June 2018.
Present: Shri V.Jagadeesh, B.Sc., LL.M.
I Addl. C.M.M BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT U/s.355 Cr.P.C.,
Case No. : C.C.No.3934/2014
Date of Offence : 3-9-2012
Name of complainant : State by Halasuru Gate Police Station,
Bengaluru.
Name of accused : 1. Smt.Sukanya w/o late Ravi
2. Kavitha
both are r/o No.240, 12th main,
II Stage, Nagarabhavi,
Bengaluru 72.
3. Shashishekar Naik J.
4. Yashavantha Pamar Naik J.
accused Nos.3 and 4 are r/o No.185/1,
Milk Colony, Subramanyapura,
Bengaluru 21.
Offence complained off: U/s.341, 504, 323, 355 and 506 r/w
Sec.34 of IPC.
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
2 C.C.No.3934/2014
Final Order : As per final order
Date of Order : 18-6-2018.
JUDGMENT
The Inspector of Police, Halasuru Gate Police Station, Bengaluru has filed the charge sheet against the accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 504, 323, 355 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that, on 3-9-2012 when C.W.1, 2 and 5 after attending VII Fast Track Court, Bengaluru returning to their house at about 2 p.m, the accused Nos.1 to 4 with common intention restrained them and abused them in filthy language and assaulted C.W.1 and caused simple injuries and accused No.3 assaulted C.W.5 with chappal and also threatened them with dire consequences of life. Under such circumstances, the complainant has filed a complaint against the accused Nos.1 to 4 before the jurisdictional police. Accordingly, the Halasuru Gate Police have registered the case against the accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 504, 323, 3 C.C.No.3934/2014 355 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC in Crime No.460/2012. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet against the accused Nos.1 to 4 for the aforesaid offences.
3. After appearance of the accused Nos.1 to 4, necessary documents as relied by the prosecution, are furnished to the accused Nos.1 to 4 as provided under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. Charge has been framed and same is read over and explained to the accused Nos.1 to 4. The accused Nos.1 to 4 pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried. Therefore, the case was posted for prosecution evidence.
4. C.Ws.1 to 10 have been cited as charge sheet witnesses. In order to prove the guilt of the accused Nos.1 to 4, during the course of trial, C.Ws.5 and 2 are examined as P.Ws.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P1 and P2. Since P.Ws.1 and 2 have not supported the case of the prosecution and turned hostile, recording of evidence of other prosecution witnesses does not serve the purpose. Hence the prayer made by the learned Senior 4 C.C.No.3934/2014 A.P.P. was rejected and C.Ws.1, 3, 4 and 6 are dropped as per order dated 29-5-2018.
5. After completion of prosecution evidence, there is no incriminating material evidence found on the record against the accused Nos.1 to 4. Therefore, recording of statement of accused Nos.1 to 4 under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was dispensed with. Similarly, the accused Nos.1 to 4 have not adduced any defence evidence on their behalf. Therefore, there is no defence evidence on behalf of the accused Nos.1 to 4.
6. Heard the arguments of learned Senior A.P.P. and counsel appearing for accused. The points that would arise for my consideration are as under:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused Nos.1 to 4 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 341, 504, 323, 355 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC?
2. What Order ?
7. My answer to the above points are as under:
5 C.C.No.3934/2014
Point No.1: In the Negative.
Point No.2: As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
8. Point No.1:- The contention of the prosecution is that, on 3-9-2012 when C.W.1, 2 and 5 after attending VII Fast Track Court, Bengaluru, returning to their house at about 2 p.m, the accused Nos.1 to 4 with common intention restrained them and abused them in filthy language and assaulted C.W.1 and caused simple injuries and accused No.3 assaulted C.W.5 with chappal and also threatened them with dire consequences of life and thereby the accused Nos.1 to 4 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 341, 504, 323, 355 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
9. In order to prove the guilt of the accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offences punishable under Section 341, 504, 323, 355 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC, C.W.5 is examined as P.W.1 who is the mother of the complainant and mother-in-law of C.W.2. It is further deposed by P.W.1 that there was no quarrel between her 6 C.C.No.3934/2014 and accused persons. Since P.W.1 has not supported the case of the prosecution, she was treated as hostile witness and cross-examined by the learned Senior A.P.P. with the permission court, but in the course of cross-examination nothing has been elicited to prove the alleged incident.
10. The wife of complainant C.W.2 is examined as P.W.2 who has also deposed that there was no quarrel between them and accused persons. She further deposed that she has not made any statement before the police, therefore, she was treated hostile witness and cross-examined by the learned Senior A.P.P. with the permission of the court, but in the course of cross-examination, nothing has been elicited to prove the alleged incident so as to punish the accused persons for the alleged offences. So far as other prosecution witnesses are concerned, their presence is not secured inspite of sufficient time and repeated issuance of warrants. Therefore they are dropped. The evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused Nos.1 to 4 for the alleged offences. Therefore, in view of 7 C.C.No.3934/2014 the above discussions and reasonings, I am of the opinion that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 504, 323, 355 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, it is held that that the accused Nos.1 to 4 are entitled for acquittal for the alleged offences. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 in the negative.
11. Point No.2:- In view of my answer on the point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The accused Nos.1 to 4 are not found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 504, 323, 355 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC. Therefore, they are is acquitted for the said offences under Section 248(1) Cr.P.C.
The bail bonds executed by the accused Nos.1 to 4 stands cancelled.8 C.C.No.3934/2014
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, revised and then corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 18th day of June 2018).
(V.Jagadeesh) I Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of prosecution:-
P.W.1, Smt.Jayalakshmi, P.W.2, Smt.Varsha;
List of documents marked on behalf of prosecution:-
Ex.P1, Spot mahazar, Ex.P1(a), Signature of P.W.2, Ex.P2, Statement of P.W.2; Material Objects Produced:- NIL
Witnesses examined on behalf of the defence, documents marked:- NIL.
(V.Jagadeesh) I Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.9 C.C.No.3934/2014
18/6/2018 State by Sr.APP Accused Nos.1 to 4 C/B For Judgment (Judgment pronounced in the Open Court) ORDER The accused Nos.1 to 4 are not found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 504, 323, 355 and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC. Therefore, they are is acquitted for the said offences under Section 248(1) Cr.P.C.
The bail bonds executed by the accused Nos.1 to 4 stands cancelled.
I ACMM, Bengaluru.10 C.C.No.3934/2014
11 C.C.No.3934/2014