Bangalore District Court
State By Rajajinagar Police Station vs Has Examined Six Witnesses. P.W.1 ... on 15 February, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, AT BANGALORE.
Dated this the 15th day of February 2016
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. 17954/2012
2.Date of Offence 22.05.2012
3.Complainant State by Rajajinagar Police Station
4.Accused 1. D.Lokesh,
S/o. Dharmaiah Naidu,
Aged about 36 years,
2.Rani.
W/o.Lokesh,
Aged about 34 years,
Also r/at No.146/A, 2nd Floor,
5th Main Road, 4thBlock,
Rajajinagar, Bangalore City.
5. Offence complained U/Sec. 326, 504 and 506 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 15-2-2016
2 C.C.No.17954/2012
REASONS
The Sub Inspector of Police, Rajajinagar Police Station,
Bangalore has filed this charge sheet against the accused
Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under section 326,
504 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that, on
22-5-2012 at 6.30 p.m., near house No.146/A, 5th main,
4th block, Rajajinagar, within the limits of Rajajinagar Police
Station the accused Nos.1 and 2 picked up quarrel with C.W.1
Kumari Lavanya, C.W.6 Smt. Shashikala, C.W.7 Sri.
D.Bhakthavatsala and C.W.8 Sri Jayanthkrishna pertaining to
family property dispute and thereby accused No.1 dropped
stone from 1st floor of said house on the head of C.W.6 Smt.
Shashikala caused grievous injuries, further both accused
persons intentionally abused C.Ws.1, 6, 7 and 8 in filthy
language and gave provocation to them to break the public
peace and further the accused persons threatened them with
dire consequences of life and thereby committed aforesaid
offences.
3. The accused Nos.1 and 2 are on bail. Copies of charge
sheet have been furnished to the accused persons as required
under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing on charges of both
counsels, this court has framed the charge for the offences
punishable under section 326, 504 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC., for
3 C.C.No.17954/2012
which accused persons denied the charge and claimed to be
tried.
4. The prosecution to prove guilt against accused
persons have examined six witnesses and got marked seven
documents as per Exs.P.1 to P.7 and also marked two material
objects as per MOs.1 and 2. Since C.Ws.3 to 5, 9 to 12 did not
turn up before this court, by rejecting the prayer of Sr.APP,
this court dropped the examination of said witnesses.
5. Thereafter, this court examined the accused as
required U/s.313 of Cr.P.C., the accused persons denied the
incriminating evidence appeared against them and submitted
that they have no defence evidence.
6. I have heard both counsels and perused the evidence
on record.
7. As stated above, the prosecution to prove guilt against
accused has examined six witnesses. P.W.1 B.S.Lavanya is
the complainant and victim to the alleged incident. P.W.2
Sharath.V is an eyewitness to the alleged incident. P.W.3
D.Bhakthavatsala is the victim and eyewitness to the alleged
incident. P.W.4 Shashikala is the injured witness. P.W.5
T.Puttaraju is the investigating officer. P.W.6
B.S.Jayanthkrishna is the victim and another eyewitness to
the alleged incident. Inspite of giving sufficient opportunities,
4 C.C.No.17954/2012
the prosecution has not examined other witnesses on record
i.e., independent spot mahazar witnesses, one eyewitness, two
doctors and another investigating officer.
8. I have carefully perused the evidence on record.
9. As stated above, P.W.1 is the complainant and victim
to the alleged incident. P.W.3 D.Bhakthavatsala and P.W.6
B.S.Jayanthakrishna are the victims and eyewitnesses to the
alleged incident. P.W.4 Shashikala is the injured witness.
P.W.3 D.Bhakthavatsala in his evidence has stated that when
the accused persons dropped the stone on the head of his wife
P.W.4 Smt. Shashikala herein, he has not presented.
Therefore, P.W.3 is not an eyewitness to the alleged incident.
P.W.6 B.S.Jayanthakrishna the son of P.W.3 has stated that
he does know anything about the facts of this case and he has
not given any statement to the police. Therefore, P.W.6 is also
not an eyewitness to the alleged incident. P.W.1 B.S.Lavanya
and P.W.4 Smt. Shashikala are the material witnesses.
Though P.W.2 Sharath.V is also eyewitness to the alleged
incident and spoken regarding incident, his evidence is not
completed because he has not tendered for further
examination. Therefore, the testimony of P.W.2 cannot be
looked into. Moreover, the accused persons have lost their
right of cross-examination of P.W.2.
5 C.C.No.17954/2012
10. The testimony of P.Ws.1 and 4 indicating that on
22-5-2015 at 6-30 p.m., P.W.4 was taking milk by standing
outside of her house. At that time the accused persons
dropped the stone from 1st floor and it caused injuries on her
head. The testimony of P.W.1 further indicating that
immediately she and her neighbors shifted C.W.4 to the
hospital for treatment. The testimony of P.Ws.1 and 4 further
indicating that since there is civil dispute between their family
and accused persons, keeping the said enmity, the accused
persons have done so. However, P.Ws.1 and 4 in their cross
examination of learned counsel for the accused persons dated
11-1-2016 have admitted that they does not know who
dropped the stone and caused injuries to P.W.3 on 22-5-2012
at 6-30 p.m. They further admitted that accused persons have
not abused them in filthy language and they have not
threatened them with dire consequences of life. The said
admission of P.Ws.1 and 4 is quite contrary to their
examination in chief. So also P.W.3 D.Bhakthavatsala the
father of P.W.1 and husband of P.W.4 in his cross-
examination dated 11-1-2006 has reiterated that he does not
know who caused injuries to his wife. He further admitted
that the accused persons have not abused himself and his
family members in filthy language and they have not
threatened them with dire consequences of life. His said
admission is also quite contrary to his examination in chief.
Therefore, the testimony of P.Ws.1, 3 and 4 is not trustworthy
6 C.C.No.17954/2012
to believe. Further P.Ws.1, 3, and 4 in their cross-
examination have admitted that they and accused persons
have compromised the matter outside the court. Since they
and accused persons have compromised the matter outside
the court that is the reason why they go by to the case of the
prosecution. Since P.Ws.1, 3 and 4 the material witnesses not
supported the case of the prosecution, no need to discuss in
detail to know whether the prosecution has proved its case
beyond all reasonable doubt. Apart from this P.W.6 the son of
P.W.3 who is eyewitness to the alleged incident has totally
turned hostile.
11. P.W.5 T.Puttaraju the investigating officer has
deposed regarding investigation. In my opinion, the testimony
of P.W.5 is only formal one and need not required detailed
consideration.
12. Though the prosecution to prove its case has
examined six witnesses, it has failed to bring home the guilt of
accused Nos.1 and 2 beyond all reasonable doubt.
Accordingly, the 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 section 326, 504 and 506 r/w 34 IPC.
7 C.C.No.17954/2012Hence, acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C the accused Nos.1 and 2 have been acquitted for the above-referred offences.
Their bail bonds and suety bonds stand cancelled.
M.O.1 the stone and M.O.2 the CDs are being worthless shall be destroyed 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 15th day of February 2016) (J.V.Vijayananda) IX Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:
P.W.1 B.S.Lavanya P.W.2 Sharata.V. P.W.3 Bhaktavatsala P.W.4 Shashikala P.W.5 T.Puttaraju P.W.6 B.S.Jayantakrishna
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P1, Complaint,
Ex.P1(a), Signature of P.W.1,
8 C.C.No.17954/2012
Ex.P.1(b) Signature of P.W.5
Ex.P2, Mahazar,
Ex.P2(1), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P.2(a) Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P.2(b) Signature of P.W.5,
Ex.P.3 Mahazar,
Ex.P.3.(a) Signature of P.W.3, Ex.P.3.(b) Signature of P.W.5 Ex.P.4 Report Ex.P.4(a) Signature of P.W.5 Ex.P.5 Wound certificate Ex.P.6 Wound Certificate (BGS) Ex.P.7 Statement of P.W.6.
LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:
M.O.1 and 2 Stone and CD.
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED, DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE:
Ex.D.1 Photo IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bangalore.9 C.C.No.17954/2012
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 section 326, 504 and 506 r/w 34 IPC.
Hence, acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C the accused Nos.1 and 2 have been acquitted for the above referred offences.
Their bail bonds and suety bonds stand cancelled.
M.O.1 the stone and M.O.2 the CD are being worthless shall be destroyed after appeal period is over.
IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bangalore.