Bangalore District Court
State By Kamakshipalya P.S vs Shivaramaiah S/O Puttaswamy Gowda on 6 April, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU CITY
Dated this the 6th day of April 2016.
Present: Sri A. Somashekhara, B.A.L., L.L.M.,
V Addl., C.M.M., Bengaluru City.
CC No.14534/2012
Complainant: State by Kamakshipalya P.S.,
(Rep., by Sr. APP, Bengaluru)
Vs.
Accused: Shivaramaiah S/o Puttaswamy Gowda,
55 Yrs.,
R/o Shanthidhama School Road,
Byraveshwaanagar, Sunkadakatte,
Bangalore-91.
(Rep. by Subhas, Adv.,)
JUDGMENT AS PER SEC. 355 Cr.P.C.
1. Serial number of the case : CC No.14534/2012
2. Date of the commission of
the offence : 13.02.2012
3. The name of the complainant : Sri Narayanagowda
4. Name of the accused person
and his parentage and residence: As stated above.
5. The offence complained off :U/s.285 IPC & U/s.3 EC Act 1955
2
CC No.14534/2012
are proved U/s.3 & 4 of Petroleum Act 1934
6. The plea of the accused and : Pleaded not guilty and
his examination denied the incriminating
evidence.
7. The final order : Acquitted.
8. The date of such order : 06.04.2016.
THE BRIEF REASONS FOR FINAL ORDER:
The prosecution's case in brief is that the accused on
13.02.2012 at about 20.00 hours at I Floor situated at
Chowdeshwari Cycle Mart Building, near Lakshmi Narasimha
Swamy Temple, Magadi Main Road, Sunkadakatte, within the
limits of Kamaksipalya P.S., found that to make illegal gain
without having any valid license or permit, and without taking any
precautionary measures, by knowing fully well that the same
causes dangerous to the Human life, refilling the gas from
domestic gas cylinders to 2 and 4 kgs., small gas cylinders. Thus
the accused has committed an offences punishable U/s.285 of
3
CC No.14534/2012
IPC, Sec.3 of EC Act and Sec.3 and 4 of Petroleum Act 1934.
Hence, the charge sheet.
2.During crime stage, the accused enlarged on regular bail.
After submission of this charge sheet, this court has taken
cognizance of the aforesaid offences against the aforesaid
accused person. Copies of the charge sheet have been furnished
to him as per Sec. 207 of Cr.P.C. With no objection from the
Counsel for the Accused, this Court framed charge for the
aforesaid offences against him. The same read over and
explained to him in the language known to him. The accused
pleaded not guilty. The prosecution has examined the
complainant, CW.4, and 6, as PWs.1 to 3 and it has got marked
three documents as Ex.P1 to P3. Statement of the accused as
required U/sec. 313 of Cr.P.C has been recorded. The accused
person has denied the incriminating evidence that appeared
against him and that he has submitted that he has no defence
evidence.
4
CC No.14534/2012
3.Heard the arguments of both sides, perused evidence
placed before the court.
4.The following points that would arises for my
determination:
1.Whether the prosecution proves that the the
accused on 13.02.2012 at about 20.00 hours at I
Floor situated at Chowdeshwari Cycle Mart Building,
near Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy Temple, Magadi
Main Road, Sunkadakatte, within the limits of
Kamaksipalya P.S., found that to make illegal gain
without having any valid license or permit, and
without taking any precautionary measures, by
knowing fully well that the same causes dangerous
to the Human life, refilling the gas from domestic
gas cylinders to 2 and 4 kgs., small gas cylinders
and thereby committed an offences punishable
U/s.285 of IPC, Sec.3 of EC Act 1955 and Sec.3 and
4 of Petroleum Act 1934 as alleged?
2.What order?
5
CC No.14534/2012
5.My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1- in the negative
Point No.2 - As per final order for
for the following:-
REASONS
6.POINT NO.1:-This case has been registered in view of
the Ex.P1 complaint that submitted to the then SHO,
Kamakshipalya P.S., on 13.02.2012 and 21.45 hours by the
complainant-K Narayana Gowda, PSI, Kamakshipalaya P.S.,
Bangalore. In the complaint marked at Ex.P1 complainant has
reiterated almost all the facts as averred in col., No.7 of charge
sheet and para No.1 of this Judgement. Therefore, he requested
the then SHO of Kamakshipalya P.S., , Bangalore, to take suitable
action against the accused person. Thereafter, complainant has
produced Ex.P2 Mahazar along with seized articles to the I.O.,
The same discloses that the complainant conducted raid over the
shop of accused on 13.02.2012 in between 8.15 p.m. to 9.15 p.m.
After receipt of the said complaint and Mahazar, I.O., has
6
CC No.14534/2012
submitted Ex.P3 FIR to this Court, and conducted the
investigation and submitted charge sheet against the accused
persons to this Court.
5.During the course of his oral evidence that recorded at
the time of examination in chief, complainant-PW.1 K. Narayana
Gowda has specifically reiterated almost all the facts as stated by
him in the complaint marked at Ex.P1. Therefore, he has
submitted the complaint marked at Ex.P1.
6.PW.2 Vajravelu is one of the raiding member, who has
deposed evidence in similar to the evidence of complainant.
uresh Kumar is an attesting witness to Ex.P2 Mahazar.
7.PW.3 Mohammed Mukaram is the I.O., of this case. He
has deposed about of receipt of Ex.P1 complaint along with
Ex.P2, registration of this case, submission of Ex.P3 FIR to the
Court, and recording statements of witnesses The said evidence
of PW.3 discloses that he has deposed only about investigational
aspects of this case.
7
CC No.14534/2012
8.In this case the evidence of PW.1 is not reliable in nature.
The evidence of PW.1 is not supported by any other independent
witnesses. Therefore, I am of the view that only on the basis of
evidence of PW.1 and 2, it would be very difficult to accept that
the accused person has committed the offences as alleged
against him on the aforesaid date time and place. Further in this
case even after granting sufficient opportunity the prosecution
has failed to secure the presence of CWs.3 to 5 and failed to
adduce their evidence. Non-examination of CWs.3 to 5 would
leads to draw an adverse inference and it is fatal to the case of
the prosecution. In the absence of the evidence of CWs.3 to 5 in
my opinion the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case
as alleged against the accused person beyond all reasonable
doubt. The accused persons are entitle for acquittal. Accordingly,
I answer Point No.1 in the Negative.
9.POINT NO.2:- In view of the aforesaid discussion, this
court proceed to pass the following:-
8
CC No.14534/2012
ORDER
By acting U/s 248 (1) Cr.P.C. the aforesaid accused person is hereby acquitted of the offences punishable U/s.285 of IPC and Sec.3 of Essential Commodities Act 1955, Sec.3 and 4 of Petroleum Act 1934.
He shall be set at liberty forthwith if he is not required to other cases. However, his bail and surety bonds are hereby extended for a period of 6 months from this date in view of Secs.437 (A) of Cr.P.C., (Dictated to the Stenographer through computer, printout taken by him is verified, after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 6th day of April 2016).
(A. SOMASHEKARA) V Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION PW.1 K Narayana Gowda PW.2 Vajravelu PW.3 Mohammed Mukaram
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex.P1 Complaint dtd., 13.02.2012 Ex.P2 Mahazar Ex.P3 FIR.
3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE: NIL
4. LIST OF THE MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION: NIL (A. SOMASHEKARA) V Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
9CC No.14534/2012 06.04.2016 Case called. Accused present/absent. State by Sr. APP Accused on bail For Judgment Judgment pronounced in the open Court as under
vide separate Judgement kept in the file.
By acting U/s 248 (1) Cr.P.C. the aforesaid accused person is hereby acquitted of the offences punishable U/s.285 of IPC and Sec.3 of Essential Commodities Act 1955, Sec.3 and 4 of Petroleum Act 1934.
He shall be set at liberty forthwith if he is not required to other cases. However, his bail and surety bonds are hereby extended for a period of 6 months from this date in view of Secs.437 (A) of Cr.P.C., (A. SOMASHEKARA) V Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
10 CC No.14534/2012