Bangalore District Court
State Of Karnataka By; vs In 1. Umesha S/O Kumaraswamy on 5 January, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE LXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-69)
Dated this the 5th day of January 2016
PRESENT
Sri.Shivaji Anant Nalawade, B.Com., LL.B.(Spl.)
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
SESSION CASE Nos.252/2011 AND S.C.193/2013
COMPLAINANT : State of Karnataka by;
Vivekanagara Police Station, Bengaluru.
(By Learned Public Prosecutor)
- Vs -
ACCUSED IN 1. Umesha S/o Kumaraswamy,
S.C.252/2011: Aged about 26 years,
Residing at No.66/2, 3rd Main,
Jnanajyothinagara, Sunkadakatte,
Near Sollapuram Temple,
Magadi Main Road, Benglauru - 40.
ACCUSED IN 2. Rajendra S/o Jayanna,
S.C.193/2013: Residing at No.7,
Jyothi Nagara,
Chandra Layout, Bengaluru.
3. Hanumegowda S/o Kullegowda,
Aged about 36 years,
Residing at No.105, Poovaiah Block,
Manarayanapalya, R.T.Nagara,
Bengaluru - 32.
4. Venkatesh S/o Kullegowda,
Aged about 36 years,
Residing at No.105,
Poovaiah Block, Manarayanapalya,
R.T.Nagara, Benglauru - 32.
2 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013
(A-1 by Sri.C.N., A-2 to 4 by Sri.N.N.,
Advocates)
1. Date of commission of offence 13-05-2010
2. Date of report of occurrence 14-05-2010
3. Date of arrest of accused No.1 24-07-2010
Date of release of accused No.1 21-10-2010
Period undergone in custody 2 Months, 28 Days
4. Date of commencement of evidence 16-06-2012
5. Date of closing of evidence 10-12-2014
6. Name of the complainant Sri.Shiva
Mruthyunjaya Sharma
7. Offences complained of Sec.341, 342,
364(A), 506(B) r/w
34 IPC
8. Opinion of the Judge As per the final order
9. Order of sentence Accused are
convicted
JUDGMENT
These cases are committed by the X Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru City, to the Hon'ble Prl. City Civil and Sessions Court, Bengaluru on the ground that offences punishable under Sec.341, 342, 364(A), 506(B) r/w 34 of IPC are exclusively triable by the court of Sessions.
2. The Police Sub-Inspector of Vivekanagar Police Station has filed charge-sheet against accused for the offences punishable under Sec.341, 342, 364(A), 506(B) r/w 34 of IPC 3 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 arising out of Vivekanagar Police Station in Crime No.187/2010.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as under:
It is the case of the Prosecution that, on 13-05-2010 at 3.30 p.m., CW.1-Mruthyunjaya Sharma at Bengaluru City within the limits of Vivekanagar Police Station on Ejipura Main Road, near Modern School when proceeding in the Auto, accused No.1 to 4 with common intention came there in Maruthi Omni Car bearing Reg. No.KA-02-MA-6250 and wrongfully restrained CW.1. Accused forcibly taken CW.1 out of Auto and put him in the Maruthi Omni Car and told them that they are Press persons and further told CW.1 that he went to the house of prostitute and they have taken photos and they have done video recording and gave threat to the life of CW.1. Accused have abducted CW.1 and taken to Bharani Residency Lodge and there wrongfully confined CW.1.
Accused No.2 closed plastic stick in the cloth and put the same on the chest of CW.1 and told CW.1 to pay Rs.1 lakh and further told that if he has not paid the said amount then they will furnish the photos and video recording to media and created threat to the life of CW.1. Accused have given threat 4 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 to the life of CW.1 and thereby committed the offences under Sec.341, 342, 364(A), 506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C.
3(a) CW.19 who is the Police Sub-Inspector of Thyagarajanagar Police Station on 14-05-2010 when in the Police Station at 12.25 p.m., CW.2-Rani Devi came to the Police Station and lodged a missing complaint for missing of CW.1. CW.19 has registered the same in Crime No.71/2010 and submitted the FIR to DCP, South Division. Thereafter, CW.19, CW.13, CW.17 came to the office of CW.1, there CW.19 has enquired CW.8-Amith who was working in the office of CW.1. CW.8 told CW.19 that CW.1 called him on phone and told that he is coming near HDFC Bank ATM situated at Gandhi Bazar and asked him to bring Rs.10,000/- and cheque book. Thereafter, CW.19, CW.13 and CW.17 went along with CW.8 near Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank ATM at 3.00 p.m. One Maruthi Omni came there and in the said vehicle 4 persons were there, the said vehicle stopped some distance away from CW.19. Thereafter, CW.1 and another person came out of the said vehicle and came towards CW.8, CW.8 introduced them to CW.1 and told that they are Thyagarajanagar Police, at that time person who came along with CW.1 came to know that the Thyagarajanagar Police 5 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 came along with CW.8, so the said persons left CW.1 there itself and ran away and boarded in the Maruthi Van and the said persons ran away in the Maruthi Van. Thereafter, CW.19 has brought CW.1 to the Police Station at 4.30 p.m. CW.1 has given complaint before CW.19. CW.19 has inserted Sec.341, 342, 364(A), 506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C. in Crime No.71/2010 and submitted FIR to the court. Thereafter, CW.1 taken CW.19 to the place where from he has been abducted and shown the place, there CW.9 has drawn Mahazar in presence of CW.1 and 3 as per Ex.P4. CW.19 has prepared rough sketch of the spot thereafter CW.19 has recorded the statements of CW.2 and 8. On 15-05-2010, CW.19 has sent CW.1 to Victoria Hospital for treatment. On 16-05-2010 CW.19 directed his officials to catch-hold the accused persons. On the same day the officials of CW.19 catch-hold accused No.1-Umesha and accused No.3-Hanumegowda, produced before CW.19 at 2.30 p.m. CW.19 has arrested accused No.1, 3 and recorded their voluntary statements. Accused No.1 has given voluntary statement as per Ex.P16 before CW.19, accused No.3 has given voluntary statement as per Ex.P17 before CW.19 thereafter CW.19 called CW.4, 5-Panchas and informed the information to them. Accused No.1 has produced Rs.2,600/- 6 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013 before the Panchas, accused No.3 has produced Rs.2,200/- cash before the Panchas and they have also produced Mobiles, CW.19 has seized the same by drawing the Mahazar thereafter CW.19 has subjected the properties under P.F.No.54/2010. Thereafter, accused No.1 and 3 taken CW.19 and Panchas viz., CW.6 and 7 to Vayyalikaval HDFC Bank ATM and told that they have withdrawn Rs.10,000/- from the ATM, there CW.19 has drawn Mahazar as per Ex.P24. Thereafter, accused No.1 and 3 taken CW.19 and Panchas to Malleshwaram 14th Cross, City Bank ATM and told that they have drawn Rs.4,500/- there. CW.19 has drawn Mahazar as per Ex.P25 in presence of CW.6 and 7-Panchas. On 17-05-2010, CW.19 has entrusted accused No.1 and 3 to judicial custody thereafter on 20-05-2010 CW.19 has transferred the case to Vivekanagar Police Station on territorial jurisdiction point.
3(b) CW.20 who is the Police Sub-Inspector of Vivekanagar Police Station on 20-05-2010 received the entire file in Crime No.71/2010 of Thyagarajanagar Police Station on territorial jurisdiction ground. CW.20 has also received the properties seized in the said case and on the basis of the letter given by the Thyagarajanagar Police, registered the case in Crime No.187/2010 and submitted FIR to the Court. CW.20 7 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 has subjected the properties in P.F.65/2010. On 28-07-2010, accused No.1 was in judicial custody, CW.20 has given application for taking accused No.1 to Police custody and taken accused No.1 to Police custody from 28-07-2010 to 30- 07-2010. On 28-07-2010, CW.20 has recorded the voluntary statement of accused No.1-Umesh, on 29-07-2010, CW.20 has taken accused No.1 to Bharani Residency, there accused No.1 has told hat he has wrongfully confined CW.1 in the said hotel. CW.20 has enquired the Cashier Narayana and shown accused No.1 to him and recorded his statement. On 30-07- 2010, CW.20 has entrusted accused No.1 to judicial custody.
3(c) On 25-08-2010, CW.20 and his officials went for catch-holding the remaining accused and vehicle used for committing the offence. CW.20 has contacted the informants and as per their information came near Kamakshipalya Pooja Kalyana Mantapa, there one Omni Car bearing Reg.No.KA-02- MA-6250 was there and one person was in the said vehicle who ran away. CW.20 has seized the said vehicle in presence of Panchas viz., CW.10 and 11. CW.20 has subjected the vehicle in P.F.116/2010, CW.20 has called CW.1 and shown the vehicle to him and recorded his further statement. On 25- 08-2010, CW.20 has recorded the statements of CW.18 8 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 thereafter as the investigation is completed, CW.20 has filed the charge-sheet against the accused.
4. After filing the charge-sheet by the Investigating Officer, X Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru has taken cognizance against accused and registered the case in C.C.22944/2010. Thereafter court has secured the presence of accused No.1, accused No.2 to 4 in spite of issuance of NBW against them on several occasions not secured, NBW issued against them returned unexecuted, so the trial court has splitted the case against accused No.2 to 4 and directed the Investigating Officer to file separate charge- sheet against accused No.2 to 4. Thereafter, X Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru has furnished charge sheet copies to accused as contemplated under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C., thereafter the X Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru has committed the case against accused No.1 before the Hon'ble Prl. City Civil and Sessions Court, Bangalore and that was registered as S.C.252/2011 and made-over to this court for disposal according to law against accused as the offence under Sec.364(A) of I.P.C. is exclusively triable by the Sessions Court. 9 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013
5. The Investigating Officer has filed the splitted charge-sheet against accused No.2 to 4 before the X Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru. Thereafter, trial court has taken the cognizance against accused No.2 to 4 and registered case in C.C.22962/2011 thereafter X Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru has secured the presence of accused No.2 to 4 and committed the case against accused No.2 to 4 before the Hon'ble Prl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru and the same was numbered as S.C.193/2013 and made over to this court for disposal according to law as the offence alleged under Sec.364(A) of I.P.C. is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.
6. After receipt of records in S.C.252/2011 and S.C.193/2013, this court has clubbed the said cases as the said cases arise out of Crime No.187/2010 of Vivekanagar Police Station and ordered to record common evidence in S.C.252/2011 and dispose off both the cases by this court in common judgment.
7. Thereafter, this court has heard the counsel for accused and learned Public Prosecutor for accused on charge to be framed against the accused. Charge under Sec.240 of 10 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 Cr.P.C. framed against the accused in both the cases for the offences under Sec.341, 342, 364(A), 506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C. and read-over to the accused in both the cases in the open court and accused pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried.
8. Thereafter Prosecution has called upon to prove the guilt of the accused by examining the Prosecution witnesses. Prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt in all examined 15 witnesses as PW.1 to 15, got marked 26 documents as per Ex.P1 to 26 and marked 3 material objects as MO.1 to 3 and closed its side. Thereafter, accused examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. to enable them to explain the 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.
9. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the accused and learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of the state in length in both the cases.
10. The points that arise for my determination are:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused No.1 to 4, on 11 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 13-05-2010 at 3.30 p.m., within the limits of Vivekanagar Police Station, near Modern School which CW.1 was proceeding in the Auto, accused No.1 to 4 with common intention came there in Maruthi Omni bearing Reg. No.KA-02-MA-6250 and wrongfully restrained CW.1 from proceeding ahead and thereby committed the offence punishable under Sec.341 r/w 34 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused No.1 to 4, on the above said date, time and place, with common intention wrongfully restrained CW.1 and accused forcibly taken CW.1 out of Auto and put him in the Maruthi Omni Car and told him that they are media persons and further told him that he went to the house of prostitute and they have taken photos and they have done video recordings and gave threat to the life of CW.1, thereafter accused have abducted CW.1 and taken to Bharani Residency Room and there wrongfully confined CW.1 and thereby committed the offence punishable under Sec.342 r/w 34 of I.P.C.?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused No.1 to 4, on the above said date, time and place, with 12 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 common intention wrongfully restrained CW.1 and accused forcibly taken CW.1 out of Auto and put him in the Maruthi Omni Car and told him that they are media persons and further told him that he went to the house of prostitute and they have taken photos and they have done video recordings and gave threat to the life of CW.1, thereafter accused have abducted CW.1 and taken to Bharani Residency Room and there wrongfully confined CW.1, accused No.2 closed plastic stick in the cloth and put the same on the chest of CW.1 and told CW.1 to pay Rs.1,00,000/- and further told that if he has not paid the said amount, than they will public photo and video recordings to media thereby committed the offence punishable under Sec.364(A) r/w 34 of I.P.C.?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused No.1 to 4, on the above said date, time and place, with common intention wrongfully restrained CW.1, abducted him, wrongfully confined him and gave threat to his life and thereby committed the offence punishable under Sec.506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C.?
5. What order?13 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013
11. My findings on the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 to 4 : In the AFFIRMATIVE;
Point No.5 : As per final order
For the following;
REASONS
12. POINT No.1 TO 4: The above points are
connected, hence they are taken up together for discussion.
13. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused have committed the offences punishable under Sec.341, 342, 364(A), 506(B) r/w 34 of IPC and in order to prove the guilt of the accused the prosecution in all examined 15 witnesses and they are; PW.1-Dr.N.Santhosh son of Nagendra Kumar-Medical Officer, PW.2-Mallikarjuna son of Krishnappa-Pancha on Ex.P2 Seizure Mahazar Panchanama, PW.3-Sheshappa son of Mukunda Biradar-Head Constable of Thyagarajanagar Police Station, PW.4-Salim Pasha son of Sahu Saheb-Police Constable of Thyagarajanagar Police Station, PW.5-Shiva Mruthyunjaya Sharma son of Eshwar Rudra Sharma-complainant, PW.6- Xavier son of David-Pancha on Ex.P4 Spot Mahazar, PW.7- Mahesh son of L.Lingaiah-Police Constable of Thyagarajanagar Police Station, PW.8-Suresh Kumar son of Rajamani-Pancha on Ex.P5 Seizure Mahazar, PW.9-Rani Devi wife of Shiva 14 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 Mruthyunjaya Sharma-wife of CW.1, PW.10-Syed Naveed Basheer-Pancha on Ex.P5 Seizure Mahazar, PW.11-Amith Mittal son of Ashok Mittal-employee of Company where CW.1 was the Director, PW.12-Sheshappa Mukhithappa Biradar son of Mukhithappa-Head Constable of Thyagarajanagar Police Station, PW.13-Srinivasaiah son of Late.Venkatappa-ASI of Thyagarajanagar Police Station, PW.14-Ravi son of Bettaiah- Police Sub-Inspector of Thyagarajanagar Police Station who has conducted part of investigation, PW.15-Nayaz Ahmed son of Ameer Jaan-Police Sub-Inspector of Viveknagara Police Station who has conducted later part of investigation.
14. The prosecution in order to prove guilt of the accused in all got marked 15 documents and they are; Ex.P1- MLC Register Extract of CW.1, Ex.P2-Seizure Mahazar for seizure of Maruthi Van, Ex.P3-Three photos of Maruthi Omni Car, Ex.P4-Spot Mahazar, Ex.P5-Seizure Mahazar for seizure of Mobile and cash, Ex.P6-Portion of statement of PW.8, Ex.P7- Missing complaint, Ex.P8-Portion of statement of PW.10, Ex.P9-Portion of statement of PW.11, Ex.P10-Portion of further statement PW.11, Ex.P11-Complaint, Ex.P12-Report submitted by ASI to Police Sub-Inspector, Ex.P13-Missing FIR sent to DCP, Ex.P14-FIR, Ex.P15-Rough sketch, Ex.P16-Portion of 15 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 voluntary statement of accused No.1, Ex.P17-Portion of voluntary statement of accused No.3, Ex.P18-Letter given by Police Sub-Inspector Thyagarajanagar to Vivekanagar Police Station, Ex.P19-FIR, Ex.P20-P F No.65/2010, Ex.P21-Portion of voluntary statement of accused No.1, Ex.P22-P.F. No.116/2010, Ex.P23- P.F.No.54/2010, Ex.P24-Spot Mahazar in respect of spot of HDFC ATM, Ex.P25-Spot Mahazar in respect of spot of Malleshwaram City Bank ATM, Ex.P26- Requisition given by Police Sub-Inspector of Thyagarajanagar Police Station to VIII Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru for transferring the case on territorial jurisdiction to Vivekanagar Police Station.
15. Prosecution got marked 3 Material Objects and they are MO.1-Mobile, MO.2-Mobile, MO.3-Cash of Rs.4,800/-.
16. Perusal of the complaint which is at Ex.P11 discloses that incident took place on 13-05-2010 at 03-30 p.m., and the complainant has lodged the complaint on 14-05- 2010 at 4.30 p.m. Complainant has been abducted and he has been released on 14-05-2010 and he has been brought to the Police Station and immediately he has lodged the complaint, so there is no abnormal delay on the part of the complainant in lodging the complaint.
16 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013
17. Perusal of FIR which is at Ex.P14 discloses that Police have submitted FIR to the court on 14-05-2015 at 9-00 p.m. i.e., within 6 hours from the registration of the case, so there is no abnormal delay on the part of the Police in submitting the FIR to the court.
18. Prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt examined the complainant as PW.5 and PW.5 in his evidence stated that since the year 2009 he is residing in Bengaluru. On 13-05-2010 he went to H.P. Office situated at Koramangala. Thereafter he went to Sony Circle, from there he went to Ejipura, there he went inside the massage parlour and there some other transaction was going, so he came out immediately and came to Ejipura junction and he boarded an Auto there and coming towards Basavanagudi to his office and when the Auto was proceeding from Ejipura towards Vivekanagar Police Station, one white colour Maruthi Van overtook the Auto and stopped in front of the Auto in which he was proceeding, 4 persons came out from the Auto, Auto driver also came out. The said 4 persons dragged him from the Auto and forcibly put him in the Maruthi Van, two persons sitted on both sides of him in the Van, one person was driving the Van and another person was sitted by 17 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 the side of that person, out of those person one person told him that they are media persons and told him that he went to the prostitution house and another person told him that he has to do whatever they say otherwise they will trouble him. They have taken camera in front of his face and another person asked him to tell that he went for prostitution house. He came to know the name of the said persons, the person who was sitted on the left side of him was one Umesh and person sitted on the right side was Rajendra, the person who was driving the Van was Venkatesh and the name of the person who was sitted by the side of the driver was Hanumegowda. The said person asked his permanent address, name of his wife and children, he has given any information to them. He told him that he came there from Delhi for business transaction. The said person asked him to give Rs.10 lakhs to him, he told them that he is not having that much of money, thereafter they told him to give Rs.3 lakhs, for that he has told that he is also not having any money and he told that he will pay Rs.1 lakh after talking to the employees of his Company. They have taken him to Sadashivanagar and they have withdrawn Rs.14-15 Thousand from HDFC Bank ATM. He talked to his employee Amith and asked whether money is there, he told them to take 18 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 near his office, they brought him towards his Company office and as people were gathered there, they have taken him in the City thereafter they have taken the vehicle to the Mysore Road, they have brought him to the Bharani Residencey, they have given meals to him there and asked him to arrange the money. He called to his Delhi Office and told that to credit Rs.75,000/- to his account, he told his Manager that he will come tomorrow, they have taken two rooms in the said Bharani Residency, in one room Rajendra and Umesha were there with him and other two persons were in another room. They told him to arrange for money on the next day morning. On the next day, he called his employee and told them to come near Gandhi Bazar, HDFC Bank ATM, they have brought him to Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank ATM, there Umesha and another person came out from the Van and brought him towards the Bank ATM, at that time Manager of his Company Amith came there and he brought cheque book and Rs.10,000/- and three persons came there and looking to the said persons the said Umesha and another person who were along with him ran away. The said person came to know that the said persons were Thyagarajanagar Police, so they have ran away thereafter came to the Police Station, he came to 19 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 know that his wife has lodged a missing complaint there, he has lodged the complaint thereafter Thyagarajanagar Police came to the spot and drawn Mahazar as per Ex.P4 and identified the complaint lodged by him as Ex.P11. The said persons have drawn money from the ATM which is at Sadashivanagar and thereafter they have also drawn some money from another ATM, he is not knowing the name of that area and identified the accused NO.1 to 4 present before the court as the persons who have abducted him. Further this witness has stated that, he has identified the Maruthi Van shown by the Poilce in the Police Station. The counsel for the accused cross-examined this witness and in the cross- examination this witness has stated that he has not given call details for having talked with Amith on that day. Further this witness has stated that he has signed on Ex.P4-Mahazar in the Police Station and except the same nothing has been made out in the cross-examination of this witness so as to disbelieve his evidence. No grudge or ill-will is made out in the cross- examination of this witness against accused. This witness is not having any ill-will or grudge against the accused persons. There are no reasons to disbelieve or discard the evidence of this witness. This witness has clearly identified the accused 20 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 No.1 to 4 and in his evidence he has clearly stated that on the date of incident accused No.1 to 4 came in Maruthi Van and wrongfully restrained him when he was proceeding in the Auto, they have dragged him from the Auto, forcibly put him in the Car, they have drawn money from his Bank account by using his ATM Cards, they have given threat for giving money, they have taken him to the Bharani Residence, wrongfully confined there, they have asked him to arrange for the money and when they have brought him to the HDFC Bank ATM which is at Gandhi Bazar at that time they saw the Police along with Amith, they left him and ran away and nothing has been made out in the cross-examination of this witness so as to disbelieve his evidence. This witness is not having any grudge or ill-will against the accused persons. This witness has clearly narrated the incident and identified the accused persons.
19. Prosecution has examined PW.11. PW.11 is the employee of the Company in which complainant is the Director and PW.11 in his evidence stated that he know the complainant. Complainant is the Director of the Company in which he is working. On 13-05-2010 at 2.30 p.m., complainant went to Koramangala for attending the meeting, on that day at 6.30 p.m., complainant called him and told him 21 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 that he want Rs.10,000/- urgently and asked him to arrange for the same and he arranged Rs.10,000/- and waited till 7.30 p.m. on that day but complainant has not come to the office, he locked the office and went to his house and on that day at 9.00 p.m. the wife of the complainant called him on phone and asked him why her husband has not returned to home, he told her that her husband went for attending the meeting and told him that her husband called him and asked him to arrange Rs.10,000/- and thereafter he has not returned. On the next day the wife of the complainant came to the office, he and the wife of complainant came to Thyagarajanagar Police and there the wife of complainant has given missing complaint, at that time he has received message in his phone belongs to complainant and wherein the complainant asked him to bring the cheque book and Rs.10,000/- near Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank. The Police have also seen the said message, at 2.30 p.m., he two Police personnels who were in civil dress came near HDFC Bank, Gandhi Bazar and there CW.1 has came along with two persons and out of that name of one person is Umesha and handed over the cheque book and went away and thereafter he came to know that 4 persons were abducted the complainant. Further this witness has stated that he has not 22 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 seen the accused persons who are present before the court. Prosecution treated this hostile in part and cross-examined and this witness has not supported later part of his statement. This witness has clearly stated that on 13-05-2010 complainant went to Koramangala for attending the meeting and on that day at 6.30 p.m. the complainant called him and asked him to arrange Rs.10,000/- he arranged it but complainant not came to the office. On that day at 9.00 p.m. wife of the complainant called him and enquired regarding the complainant, on the next day the wife of the complainant came to the office and he and the wife of complainant went to Thyagarajanagar Police and there wife of the complainant has lodged a missing compliant and there he received message in his phone from the complainant, wherein the complainant stated to bring the cheque book and Rs.10,000/- near Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank and Police have seen the said message, he and Police have went there and that part of evidence of this witness remained unchallenged as the accused has not cross- examined this witness and that part of evidence corroborates with the evidence of the complainant.
20. Prosecution examined the wife of complainant as PW.9. She in her evidence stated that complainant is her 23 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 husband. Her husband use to go to his work place daily and return at 6 to 6.30 p.m. and if it is not possible for him to return home in time, he use to inform to her. On 13-05-2010, her husband went to office and on that day till 8.30 p.m., her husband has not returned, she called her husband on mobile, the mobile was switched off, she called the employee of the office one Amith and he told that the friend of complainant was admitted in the Hospital, so he will not return. On the next day up to 9.00 a.m. she waited for her husband, her husband has not came, she called to Amith and one Xavier and they went to Thyagarajanagar Police Station, there she lodged a missing complaint and identified the complaint as Ex.P7. ON that day, in the afternoon she saw her husband in the Police Station and her husband told that some persons have abducted him for ransom. The evidence of this witness clearly goes to show that on the date of incident, her husband has not returned to the house and this witness has called her husband on phone, the phone was switch off and on the next day she lodged a missing complaint and thereafter on the next day afternoon she saw her husband in the Police Station and her husband told her that 4 persons have kidnapped her. Accused have not cross-examined this witness. This witness has given 24 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 some contradictions regarding the information given by Amith and the said contradictions are not material one.
21. Prosecution has examined PW.7. PW.7 is the Police Constable who went along with Police Sub-Inspector of Thyagaranagar Police Station and Amith to HDFC Bank. PW.7 in his evidence stated that in the year 2011 he was working as Police Constable at Thyagarajanagar Police Station. On 14-05- 2010 he was on day duty and on that day he along with Police Sub-Inspector, ASI went for search of accused in Crime No.71/2010 and they went near HDFC Bank, Basavanagudi. On that day one Amith was also accompanied them, Amith has shown accused Umesh and Hanumegowda, some distance away from the spot one Omni Car was there and the said persons ran away. Further this witness has stated that 4 persons were came in Maruthi Van, Amith has talked with the complainant and as the accused persons came to know that they are the Police personnels, the said persons ran away. This witness has been cross-examined by the counsel for the accused and nothing has been made out in the cross- examination of this witness. Further this witness has also stated that on 16-05-2010 he went for catch-holding the accused along with other officials and they contacted the 25 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 informants and they came to know that near Sunkadakatte bus stop accused Umesha and Hanumegowda are there and informants have shown them and they have catch-hold the said persons and brought to the Police Station.
22. Prosecution has examined PW.13 who is the ASI of Vivekanagar Police Station who went to HDFC Bank with Police Sub-Inspector of Amith and he in his evidence stated that in the year 2010 he was working as ASI at Thyagarajanagar Police Station. On 14-05-2010, CW.19 who is the Police Sub- Inspector of his Police Station taken him and other officials for catch-holding the accused persons in Crime NO.71/2010. On that day they went to Global Services Company situated at S.R.Colony, there they met Amith and Amith told them that he has received call from the complainant Shiva Mruthyunjaya and he told him to come near Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank along with cheque book and Rs.10,000/- and on that day, himself, Police Sub-Inspector and other officials came along with Amith near HDFC Bank at 3.00 p.m., there 4 persons along with the complainant came in Maruthi Omni and there one person has brought the complainant and the person who brought the complainant came to know that they are Police personnels and the person who brought the complainant is Umesha and the 26 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 said persons ran away and they have brought the complainant to the Police Station. Further this witness has stated that on 16-05-2010, they went for catch-holding the accused in this case along with other officials and they contacted the informants and informants told that the accused in this case near Sunkadakatte Bus Stand thereafter they went there and there two persons were there and they catch-hold them and enquired their names, they have told their names as Umesha and Hanumegowda, they have catch-hold them and brought to the Police Station. This witness has been cross-examined and in the cross-examination this witness has stated that he cannot say what type of dress was worn by the complainant on that day, on that day they have not chased the said 4 persons who ran away, he cannot say on which side the van went away, he cannot say the boundaries of the spot where they catch-hold accused No.1 and 3 and except the same, nothing has been made out in the cross-examination of this witness so as to disbelieve his evidence. The above admissions are not material admissions which will go to the root of the case and create suspicion regarding the evidence of this witness. In the evidence of this witness some minor contradictions are there and minor contradictions in the evidence of this witness clearly 27 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 goes to show that this witness is deposing truth and evidence of this witness corroborates with the evidence of the complainant.
23. Prosecution has examined PW.14 and PW.14 is the Investigating Officer who went along with the PW.13 and Amith to HDFC Bank ATM and who has conducted earlier part of investigation. PW.14 has clearly stated in his evidence that in the year 2010 he was working as Police Sub-Inspector at Thyagarajanagar Police Station. On 14-05-2010 at 12.25 p.m., when he was in the Police Station, CW.2 who is the wife of complainant came to the Police Station and lodged missing complaint and he registered the same in Crime No.71/2010. Further this witness has stated that he, CW.13, CW.17 went for searching the complainant and on that day they came to the office of the complainant and there CW.8-Amith was there and he enquired Amith and he told that the complainant has called him and told him to come near Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank ATM and also told him to bring Rs.10,000/- and cheque book. Thereafter, he, CW.8, CW.17 and CW.18 came near Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank at 3.00 p.m. and there 4 persons came in Maruthi Van and stopped nearby them and thereafter from the Van CW.1 and another person came out and they came near 28 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 them and there CW.8 introduced them to CW.1 and when the person who came along with CW.1 came to know that they are Thyagarajanagar Police, the said person left CW.1 there and ran away and the said 4 persons ran away from the Maruthi Omni, they brought complainant to the Police Station and complainant has lodged complaint and he has included Sec.341, 342, 364(A), 506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C. in Crime No.71/2010 and submitted the FIR to the Court. Thereafter, CW.1 brought them to the spot from where he has been abducted, there he has drawn Mahazar in presence of Panchas as per Ex.P4, he has prepared the sketch of the spot as per Ex.P15 thereafter he has directed his officials for catch-holding the accused persons. His officials have catch-hold the accused No.1 and 3 and produced before him, he has recorded voluntary statements of the accused. Accused No.1 and 3 have admitted regarding abducting of CW.1 and also admittd that they have drawn Rs.10,000/- and Rs.4,500/- from the account of CW.1 from the ATM and further they have told that they have spent the money withdrawn and they are having Rs.2,600/- and Rs.2,200/- thereafter he has called CW.4 and 5-Panchas and accused No.1 and 3 have produced the Mobiles and Rs.2,600/- and Rs.2,200/- respectively and he has seized 29 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 the same by drawing Ex.P5-Mahazar. Thereafter, the said persons have taken him to the ATM Centre wherefrom they have drawn the money and he has drawn the Mahazars there in presence of Panchas. Further this witness has stated regarding the investigation done by him and thereafter he came to know that the incident took-place with in the jurisdiction of Vivekanagar Police Station and he has obtained permission from VIII Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru to transfer the case to Vivekanagar Police Station and transferred the case to Vivekanagar Police Station. This witness has been cross-examined by the counsel for the accused in length and nothing has been made out from this witness so as to disbelieve the evidence of this witness. The evidence of this witness clearly corroborates the evidence of complainant, CW.13 and Amith.
24. Prosecution examined PW.1 who is the Medical Officer who has given treatment to the complainant on 15-05- 2010 and PW.1 in his evidence stated that he worked as Medical Officer at Victoria Hospital and on 15-05-2010 at 1.30 he examined the complainant as per the request of the Thyagarajanagar Police and narrated the injuries sustained and further stated that for examining the injured, he has 30 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 mentioned the same in the MLC Register and identified the MLC Register extract as Ex.P1. This witness has been cross- examined and in the cross-examination this witness has admitted that he has not given treatment to the complainant and as per the say of the injured he has examined him and mentioned the injuries in the MLC Register extract.
25. PW.2 is the Pancha on Ex.P2 Seizure Mahazar for seizure of Maruthi Omni Van and he in his evidence stated that, 5-6 years earlier to his evidence, he was near Pooja Kalyana Mantapa situated at Kamakshipalya and there one Maruthi Omni Van was there, the colour of the said Van was white, there Police have drawn Mahazar and obtained his signature and identified the Mahazar as Ex.P2. Further this witness has identified the 3 photos of the said Maruthi Omni as Ex.P3. This witness has been cross-examined and in the cross-examination this witness has admitted that he is not knowing Kannada reading and writing, he is not knowing what is written in Ex.P2, he cannot give the boundaries of the spot and number of the said vehicle and further admitted that he has signed Ex.P2 in the Police Station.
31 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013
26. PW.4 is the Police Officer and the person who catch-hold accused No.1 and 3 along with other officials and he has stated regarding catch-holding of the accused No.1 and 3.
27. PW.6 is the Pancha on Ex.P4-Spot Mahazar. PW.6 in his evidence stated that, on 14-05-2010 Vivekanagar Police came along with the complainant to Ejipura to the spot, there CW.1 has shown the spot and Police have drawn Mahazar there and identified the Mahazar as Ex.P4 and identified his signature as Ex.P4(a). This witness has been cross-examined by the counsel for the accused and in the cross-examination this witness has admitted that he is not knowing what is written in Ex.P4. Further admitted that he is working under the CW.1 and also admitted that he has signed on Ex.P4 in the Police Station.
28. PW.8 is the Pancha on Ex.P5-Mahaza and he turned hostile. PW.10 is the another Pancha and he also turned hostile.
29. PW.15 is the Investigating Officer who has conducted later part of investigation and he has stated in his evidence that on 20-05-2010 Head Constable-2864 of Thyagarajanagar Police have brought records in Crime No.71/2010 and handed-over to him on territorial jurisdiction. 32 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013 He has received the said records and properties and registered the case in Crime No.187/2010 and submitted FIR to the court, he has subjected the properties under P.F., he came to know that accused No.1 is in judicial custody and he has given application for Police custody and obtained Police custody from 28-07-2010 to 30-07-2010. On 28-07-2010, accused No.1 has given voluntary statement before him and on 29-07-2010 accused No.1 has taken him to Bharani Residency and told that they have kept CW.1 in the said Hotel, there he has recorded the statement of Cashier Narayana thereafter he has handed- over the accused to the judicial custody. On 25-08-2010, he went for seizing the vehicle used for committing the offences and as per the information of the informants they went to Pooja Kalyana Mantapa at Kamakshipalya, there one Omni Van bearing Reg. No.KA-02-M-6250 was parked and one person was there in the Car and the said person after seeing them ran away from the Car and he has seized the said Car in presence of CW.10 and 11 by drawing Ex.P2-Mahazar thereafter he has subjected the properties and thereafter as the investigation is completed he has filed the charge-sheet.
30. It is the specific case of the accused during the cross-examination of prosecution witnesses that they have not 33 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 committed any offences as alleged against them, they have been falsely implicated in this case. In the present case complainant has supported the case of prosecution and he has clearly stated in his evidence that on 13-05-2010 when he was proceeding within the limits of Vivekanagar Police Station on Ejipura Main Road, near Modern School in the Auto, accused came there in Omni Car and stopped the Auto, dragged him from the Auto and forcibly put him in the Omni Car, they have given threat to him and insisted him to give money. They have taken him to Bharani Residency, there they have confined him. Further complainant has clearly identified the accused persons and narrated regarding the incident. Except some minor contradictions in the evidence of CW.1, nothing has been made out in his cross-examination to disbelieve his evidence. No grudge or ill-will is made out in the cross- examination of CW.1 against the accused. There are no reasons to disbelieve or discard the evidence of complainant. Further PW.11 is the employee in the Company in which complainant is a Director and he has clearly stated that on 13- 05-2010 complainant went to attend the meeting to Koramangala and on that day complainant called him and told that he will come and asked him to arrange for Rs.10,000/- 34 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013 and complainant has not returned. On the next day, complainant has given message in the Mobile phone and asked him to bring Rs.10,000/- and cheque book near Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank. Further PW.11 has stated that wife of complainant on the next day came to the office and thereafter they went to the Police Station and lodged complaint and he also shown the message to the Police and he along with Police came to the Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank and there CW.1 came in Maruthi Van along with others and one person came along with CW.1 and when the said person came to know that Police are along with them, they ran away and that part of evidence of PW.1 is corroborated with the evidence of CW.1 and nothing has been made out in the cross-examination of PW.11 to disbelieve that part of evidence.
31. Further PW.7 is the Police Constable of Thyagarajanagar Police Station who went to HDFC Bank in Gandhi Bazar along with the Police Sub-Inspector and PW.11 and he has stated that he, Police Sub-Inspector, PW.11 went to HDFC Bank and there complainant and another person get down from the Maruthi Omni and when they came to know that they are Police, the person who brought CW.1 ran away and that part of evidence is corroborated with the evidence of 35 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 CW.1 and PW.11. Nothing has been made out in his cross- examination so as to disbelieve his evidence.
32. PW.13 is the ASI and who also came near the HDFC Bank on 14-05-2010 in the afternoon along with Police Sub-Inspector, PW.11, PW.7 and he has stated that he, Police Sub-Inspector, PW.7, PW.11 came near HDFC Bank in Maruthi Van, there complainant and another person came out of the said vehicle and they came near PW.11 and when they came to know that the other persons are Police personnel, the accused persons ran away and that part of evidence of PW.13 is corroborated with the evidence of PW.1, 11 and PW.7. Nothing has been made out in his cross-examination so as to disbelieve his evidence.
33. PW.14 is the Police Sub-Inspector who has conducted earlier part of investigation and who has also accompanied PW.11, 13 and PW.7 to Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank. PW.14 has clearly stated that CW.2 has lodged missing complaint of CW.1 and he has registered the case and thereafter PW.11 has received the phone call from CW.1 and wherein he has stated that to come near Gandhi Bazar HDFC Bank along with cheque book and Rs.10,000/- cash. Thereafter, he, PW.13, PW.7 accompanied PW.11 in civil dress 36 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 and at 3.00 p.m. they came near HDFC Bank and there one Omni Car came and in that Car CW.1 and 4 persons were there and CW.1 was also there, one person and CW.1 came out of the Car and came towards PW.11 and PW.11 introduced them to CW.1 and when the other person came to know that they are the Police persons, the said persons ran away in the said Omni Car and the said persons escaped from there and nothing has been made out in their cross-examination. In the present case, PW.14 has stated regarding investigation done by him i.e., drawing of Spot Mahazar as per Ex.P4, Seizure Mahazar as per Ex.P5 and seizure of Mobile and Cash. Even though in the present case, the Panchas on Ex.P5-Seizure Mahazar have turned hostile, the evidence of PW.14 clearly proves regarding drawing of Ex.P5-Mahazar and seizure of MO.1 to 3-articles. Nothing has been made out in the cross- examination of PW.14 to disbelieve the evidence of PW.14 regarding drawing of Ex.P4-Spot Mahazar and Ex.P5-Seizure Mahazar and seizure of MO.1 to 3. Nothing has been made out in the cross-examination of PW.14 so as to disbelieve his evidence regarding drawing of Ex.P4 and 5-Mahazars and seizure of Mo.1 to 3-aritlces.
37 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013
34. Further the evidence of PW.15 who has conducted later part of investigation corroborated the case of prosecution. There are some minor contradictions regarding receiving of the message by PW.11 from CW.1. PW.11 has stated that he has received message from CW.1 in his mobile whereas PW.13, PW.14 have stated that PW.11 has received call from CW.1 and the said contradictions are minor contradictions and will not go to the root of the case and not create suspicion regarding the incident. In the present case, complainant has clearly narrated regarding the incident and identified the accused persons, so the evidence of PW.11, PW.7, PW.13, PW.14 and PW.15 corroborates the case of prosecution. The evidence of PW.1 to 15, Ex.P1 to 26 and MO.1 to 3 proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused on 13-05-2010 at 3.30 p.m. accused have wrongfully restrained the complainant when he was proceeding in the Auto in Ejipura Main Road near Modern School and dragged him from the Auto and forcibly put him in the Car bearing Reg. No.KA- 02-MA-6250 and insisted him to give money, they have taken CW.1 to Bharani Residency and wrongfully confined him there, they have given threat to CW.1 and abducted him to pay the money and thereby committed the offences punishable under 38 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 Sec.341, 342, 364(A), 506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C. Hence, for the above discussion, I answer point No.1 to 4 in the AFFIRMATIVE.
35. POINT No.5: In view of my findings point No.1 to 4 and reasons stated there, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Sec.235(2) Cr.P.C. accused No.1- Umesha, accused No.2-Rajendra, accused No.3- Hanumegowda and accused No.4-Venkatesha are convicted for the offences punishable under Sec.341, 342, 364(A), 506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C.
Order regarding sentence is deferred, to hear the accused regarding sentence to be passed against them as contemplated under Sec.235(2) of Cr.P.C. (Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 5th day of January, 2016).
(SHIVAJI ANANT NALAWADE) LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.39 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013 ORDER REGARDING SENTENCE Heard accused, counsel for the accused and learned Public Prosecutor regarding imposition of sentence. Accused No.1 has stated that he is aged about 30 years, he is unmarried having old aged parents and unmarried sister, his parents and unmarried sister are depending on his earning. The offence committed by him is the first offence and prayed for showing leniency while imposing sentence.
2. Accused No.2 submitted that he is aged about 30 years, he is unmarried, he is having old aged parents and his parents are depending on him. The offence committed by him is the first offence and prayed for taking lenient view while imposing sentence.
3. Accused No.3 has submitted that he is aged about 40 years, he is having wife and a son aged about 14 years, his wife and son are depending on his earnings. The offence committed by him is the first offence and prayed for taking lenient view while sentencing him.
4. Accused No.4 has stated that he is aged about 33 years, he is married, he is having wife and one son aged about 10 years. His wife and son are depending on his earning. The 40 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 offence committed by him is the first offence and prayed for showing lenient view.
5. The counsels for accused No.1 to 4 have submitted that the offence committed by the accused are the first offence and looking to the age, family background, facts and circumstances involved in this case, lenient view may be taken while sentencing the accused.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that, accused have committed the offences under Sec.364(A), 341, 342, 506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C. Accused have abducted CW.1 for ransom and committed the offences. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, accused may be sentenced severely so that it is a lesson for the others in the society not to commit such offences.
7. In the present case, prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that accused have committed the offences under Sec.364(A), 341, 342, 506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C.
The offence under Sec.364(A) of I.P.C. is punishable with death or imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine. The offence under Sec.341 of I.P.C. is punishable with simple imprisonment for one month or fine of Rs.500/- or both. The offences under Sec.342 is punishable with imprisonment for 1 41 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 year or fine of Rs.1,000/- or both. The offence under Sec.506(B) of I.P.C. is punishable with imprisonment for 7 years or fine or both.
8. In the present case, the offence under Sec.364(A) of I.P.C. is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the present case, accused are not entitled for the benefit under Sec.3 and 4 of P.O. Act and Sec.360 of I.P.C.
9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the present case, age, family background, dependents and first offence committed by the accused, sentence of imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.2,000/- each is sufficient for the offence under Sec.364(A) r/w 34 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment of two months is sufficient. Sentence of fine of Rs.500/- each is sufficient for the offence under Sec.341 r/w 34 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 days is sufficient. Further sentence to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 months is sufficient for the offence under Sec.342 r/w 34 of I.P.C. Sentence of imprisonment for 2 years and fine of Rs.500/- each is sufficient for the offence under 42 S.C.No.252/2011 & 193/2013 Sec.506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days is sufficient.
10. Accused No.1 has undergone judicial custody from 24-07-2010 to 21-10-2010. The accused No.1 is entitled for set off of judicial custody undergone by him as contemplated under Sec.228 of Cr.P.C.
11. MO.3 is the amount withdrawn from the Bank of complainant recovered from the custody of accused No.1 and
3. Accused No.1 and 3 have not claimed the said amount in this case, so the complainant is entitled for the said amount. MO.1 and 2-Mobiles, are recovered from accused No.1 and 3 and they have not claimed the said Mobiles. Hence, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDER Acting under Sec.235(2) of Cr.P.C. accused No.1- Umesha, accused No.2-Rajendra, accused No.3-Hanumegowda and accused No.4-Venkatesha; are sentenced to undergone imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- each for the offence under Sec.364(A) r/w 34 of I.P.C., in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment of two months.
Accused No.1 to 4 are sentenced to pay fine of Rs.500/- for the offence under Sec.341 r/w 34 of I.P.C. and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 days.
43 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013 Accused No.1 to 4 are sentenced to undergone simple imprisonment for 2 months for the offence under Sec.342 r/w 34 of I.P.C.
Accused No.1 to 4 are sentenced to undergone simple imprisonment for 2 years and fine of Rs.500/- each for the offence under Sec.506(B) r/w 34 of I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days.
The sentence of imprisonment shall run concurrently. The period of detention spent by the accused No.1 in judicial custody shall be taken into consideration in the event of remission and commutation of sentence under Sec.432 and 433 of Cr.P.C.
Accused No.1 is entitled for set off under Sec.428 of Cr.P.C for the period which he has already undergone being in judicial custody.
Accused No.1 has undergone judicial custody from 24- 07-2010 to 21-10-2010.
Issue conviction warrant accordingly.
MO.1 and 2-Mobiles, are confiscated to the state after the appeal period is over. MO.3-Cash is ordered to be returned to the complainant after the appeal period is over.
Office to supply the copy of the judgment to the accused. Keep the original of this judgment in S.C.252/2011 and copy in S.C.193/2013.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 5th day of January, 2016).
(SHIVAJI ANANT NALAWADE) LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.
44 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013 ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the prosecution:
PW.1 Dr.N.Santhosh CW.12 16-06-2012
PW.2 Mallikarjuna CW.10 16-06-2012
PW.3 S.M.Biradar CW.16 16-06-2012
PW.4 Saleem Pasha CW.15 16-06-2012
PW.5 Shiva Mruthyunjaya Sharma CW.1 22-06-2012
PW.6 Xavier CW.3 22-06-2012
PW.7 Mahesh CW.13 22-06-2012
PW.8 Suresh Kumar CW.5 29-06-2012
PW.9 Rani Devi CW.2 30-07-2012
PW.10 Syed Naveed Basha CW.4 30-07-2012
PW.11 Amith Mittal CW.8 30-07-2012
PW.12 S.M.Beeradar CW.16 11-06-2013
PW.13 Sreenivasaiah CW.17 11-11-2014
PW.14 B.Ravi CW.19 25-11-2014
PW.15 Nayaz Ahmed CW.20 10-12-2014
Documents marked for the prosecution:
Ex.P1 MLC Register Extract PW.1 16-06-2012
Ex.P1(a) Relevant portion of Register PW.1 16-06-2012
Ex.P1(b) Xerox attested copy PW.1 16-06-2012
Ex.P2 Seizure Mahazar PW.2 16-06-2012
Ex.P2(a) Signature of PW.2 PW.2 16-06-2012
Ex.P2(b) Signature of PW.15 PW.15 10-12-2012
Ex.P3 Three Photos PW.2 16-06-2012
Ex.P4 Spot Mahazar PW.5 22-06-2012
Ex.P4(a) Signature of PW.5 PW.5 22-06-2012
Ex.P4(b) Signature of PW.6 PW.6 22-06-2012
45 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013
Ex.P4(c) Signature of PW.14 PW.14 25-11-2014
Ex.P5 Seizure Mahazar PW.8 29-06-2012
Ex.P5(a) Signature of PW.8 PW.8 29-06-2012
Ex.P5(b) Signature of PW.10 PW.10 30-07-2012
Ex.P5(c) Signature of PW.14 PW.14 10-12-2014
Ex.P6 Portion of statement of PW.8 29-06-2012
PW.8
Ex.P7 Missing complaint PW.9 30-07-2012
Ex.P7(a) Signature of PW.9 PW.9 30-07-2012
Ex.P7(b) Signature of PW.14 PW.14 25-11-2014
Ex.P8 Statement of PW.10 PW.10 30-07-2012
Ex.P9 Portion of statement of PW.11 30-07-2012
PW.11
Ex.P10 Portion of statement of PW.11 30-07-2012
PW.11
Ex.P11 Complaint PW.5 03-09-2014
Ex.P12 Report of PW.13 PW.13 11-11-2014
Ex.P13 FIR of missing complaint PW.14 25-11-2014
Ex.P13(a) Signature of PW.14 PW.14 25-11-2014
Ex.P14 FIR PW.14 25-11-2014
Ex.P14(a) Signature of PW.14 PW.14 25-11-2014
Ex.P15 Spot Rough sketch PW.14 25-11-2014
Ex.P15(a) Signature of PW.14 PW.14 25-11-2014
Ex.P16 Portion of voluntary PW.14 25-11-2014
statement of accused No.1
Ex.P17 Portion of voluntary PW.14 25-11-2014
statement of accused No.3
Ex.P18 Report given by P.I., of PW.15 10-12-2014
Thyagarajanagar
Ex.P18(a) Signature of PW.15 PW.15 10-12-2014
46 S.C.No.252/2011 &
193/2013
Ex.P19 FIR PW.15 10-12-2014
Ex.P19(a) Signature of PW.15 PW.15 10-12-2014
Ex.P20 P.F.No.65/2010 PW.15 10-12-2014
Ex.P20(a) Two signatures of PW.15 PW.15 10-12-2014
Ex.P21 Portion of voluntary PW.15 10-12-2014
statement of accused No.1
Ex.P22 P.F.No.116/2010 PW.15 10-12-2014
Ex.P22(a) Two Signatures of PW.15 PW.15 10-12-2014
Ex.P23 P.F.No.55/2010 PW.15 10-12-2014
Ex.P23(a) Two signatures of PW.14 PW.15 10-12-2014
Ex.P24 Seizure Mahazar PW.15 10-12-2014
Ex.P24(a) Signature of PW.14 PW.15 10-12-2014
Ex.P25 Seizure Mahazar PW.14 10-12-2014
Ex.P25(a) Signature of PW.14 PW.14 10-12-2014
Ex.P26 Requisition given by P.S.I. PW.14 10-12-2014
Thygarajanagar to VIII
A.C.M.M.
Material objects marked for the prosecution:
MO.1 Mobile MO.2 Mobile MO.3 Cash of Rs.4,800/-
Witness examined, documents and material objects marked for the accused:
- Nil -
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.