Bangalore District Court
State By Hulimavu Ps vs Nikhil R S/O Ranganathan G on 18 February, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL. C.M.M., BANGALORE CITY
Dated this the Wednesday the 18th day of February 2015.
PRESENT: Sri B. VENKATESHA, B.Sc., L.L.B.,
V ADDL., C.M.M., BANGALORE CITY
CC No.1455/2014
Complainant: State by Hulimavu PS , B'lore.
(Rep.by Sr. APP, B'lore.)
V/S
Accused: Nikhil R S/o Ranganathan G, 24 Yrs.,
R/a No.172, I Main, I Phase, Arekere
Mico Layout, BG Road, Bangalore City.
(Rep. by Dhanaraj and Associates, Adv.,)
JUDGMENT AS PER SEC. 355 Cr.P.C.
1. Serial number of the case : CC No.1455/2014
2. Date of the commission of
the offence : 29.09.2013
3. The name of the complainant : Faizal Ahmed
4. Name of the accused person
and his parentage and residence: As stated above.
5. The offence complained off : Sec.324 of IPC
are proved
6. The plea of the accused and Pleaded not guilty and
his examination : denied the incriminating
evidence.
2
CC No.1455/2014
7. The final order : Acquitted.
8. The date of such order : 18.02.2015.
THE BRIEF REASONS FOR FINAL ORDER:
The prosecution's case in brief as set out in Cl. No.7 of
charge sheet is that the accused on 29.09.2013 at about 8.30
p.m. in front of shop situated at No.172/3, Arekere, Mico Layout,
BG Road, within the limits of Hulimavu P.S., insisted the
complainant-Faizal to close the shop, as the accused to get
construct steps infront of the shop, and when complainant told to
you accused without closing the shop the accused can get
construct the steps, by that time the accused abused complainant
in filthy language and when complainant questioned the same,
accused assaulted with the help of ªÀÄgÀzÀ ¸À£ÀPÉ over his head,
caused bleeding injuries. Thus, the accused person has
committed the aforesaid offence as alleged. Hence, the charge
sheet.
2. During Crime stage, the accused person enlarged on bail.
After submission of this charge sheet, this court has taken
3
CC No.1455/2014
cognizance of the aforesaid offence 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 offence
against him. Same read over and explained to him in the
language known to him. He pleaded not guilty. The prosecution
has examined the complainant as PW.1 and it has got marked
two documents as Ex.P1 and 2. Statement of the accused
persons has been dispensed since no incriminating evidence
placed against him.
3.Heard the arguments of both sides, perused evidence
placed before the court.
4. The Ex.P1 is the Oral statement of complainant of this
case dt., 29.09.2013 that recorded by the then PSI of of Hulimavu
P.S., Ex.P2 is the Mahazar dt., 30.09.2013 that prepared by the
IO in presence of the complainant and others in between 11.00
a.m. to 12.00 noon in front Kulfi More Shop and Prabha Medicals,
4
CC No.1455/2014
Mico Layout Main Road, Arekere, that situated at Hulimavu P.S.,
limits, Bangalore City.
5.In the oral statement marked as Ex.P1, the PW.1 has
specifically stated to the IO by reiterating almost all the facts as
averred in the Cl. No. 7 of Charge sheet and para No.1 of this
judgment. Whereas, during the course of his oral evidence, PW.1
has not stated the evidence as stated in the oral statement
marked as per Ex.P.1 or in Cl. No. 7 of charge sheet or in para
No.1 of this judgment. He has stated that the accused person
never assaulted him with the of ªÀÄgÀzÀ ¸À£ÀPÉ over his head as
alleged in Column No.7 of charge sheet. He further deposed
before the Court that he did not know the contents of the
documents marked in Ex.P1 and 2. PW-1 has deposed that he
did not know that for when, where and for what reason he put his
signature on the documents that are marked as Ex.P1 and 2.
PW.1 is treated as an hostile witness at the request of the
prosecution. He was subjected to cross examination on behalf of
case of the prosecution. But nothing is elicited in support of the
5
CC No.1455/2014
case of the prosecution in the evidence of PW.1 recorded during
the course of his cross-examination. The said evidence of PW.1
did not disclose that the accused person has committed the
offence as alleged against him. Since the complainant as turned
hostile, other witnesses have been discharged, since no purpose
would be survived if they were examined in view of the judgment
of Hon'ble Apex Court that reported in 1996(3) Crime 85.
Therefore, it would be very difficult to accept that the accused
person has committed the aforesaid offences as alleged.
Therefore, I am of opinion that the prosecution miserably has
failed to prove its case as alleged against the accused person
beyond all reasonable doubt. The accused person is entitled to
be acquitted.
6. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this court proceed to
pass the following:-
ORDER
By acting U/s 248(1) Cr.P.C. the aforesaid accused person is hereby acquitted of the offence punishable U/s.324 of IPC.
6CC No.1455/2014 He shall be set at liberty forthwith if he is not required to other cases. However, His bail bond is hereby extended for a period of 6 months from this date in view of Secs.437(A) of Cr.P.C., Refund cash security amount of Rs.2,000/- to accused after expiry of appeal period.
The property that recovered vide PF No.127/2013 dt., 30.09.2013 of Hulimavu P.S., is worthless. Destroy the same after expiry of appeal period.
(Dictated to the Stenographer through computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the Wednesday the 18th day of February 2015).
(B.VENKATESHA) V Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION PW.1 : Faizal Ahmed.
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex.P. 1 : Oral Statement of complainant dt., 29.09.2013 Ex.P. 2 : Mahazar dt., 30.09.2013.
3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE NIL
4. LIST OF THE METERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION NIL (B.VENKATESHA) V Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
7CC No.1455/2014 18.02.2015 State by Sr. APP Accused on bail Judgment.
Case called. Accused present/absent. 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 offence punishable U/s.324 of IPC.
He shall be set at liberty forthwith if he is not required to other cases. However, His bail bond is hereby extended for a period of 6 months from this date in view of Secs.437(A) of Cr.P.C., Refund cash security amount of Rs.2,000/- to accused after expiry of appeal period.
The property that recovered vide PF No.127/2013 dt., 30.09.2013 of Hulimavu P.S., is worthless. Destroy the same after expiry of appeal period.
(B.VENKATESHA) V Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
8 CC No.1455/2014