Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Bangalore District Court

4. Name Of The Accused Siddappa @ ... vs Is Acquitted on 15 December, 2016

IN THE COURT OF THE VIII ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.

       Dated this the 15th       day of December 2016.

          Present : Sri.Mohamed Ashraf Aris, B.A., LL.B.
                VIII ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.

                 C.C. NO. 23024/2015

      JUDGMENT U/S 355 OF THE Cr.P.C. 1973.
     1.    Sl. No. of the Case    23024/2015

     2. The date of               24/02/2014
        commission of the
        offence

     3. Name of the               State by Sanjay Nagar P.S.
        complainant

     4. Name of the accused Siddappa @ Sidaraju,
                            S/o. Neelaiah, 40 years,
                            No.59, UAS Complex,
                            Veterinary College Quarters,
                            Hebbal, Bengaluru.
     5. The offence         U/sec.498(A), 504, 506 of
        complained of or    IPC.
        proved
     6. Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
        and his examination
     7. Final Order         Acting U/sec. 248(1) Cr.PC
                            Accused is acquitted.

     8. Date of such order        15/12/2016
        For the following:-
                                 2                C.C. NO. 23024/2015




                             JUDGMENT

This is the charge sheet filed by the PSI, Sanjay Nagar P.S. against the accused for the offence punishable U/sec.498(A), 504, 506 of IPC.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that:

Accused married CW.1 prior to 10 years in accordance with customs and they were together residing at House No.59, Veterinary College Quarters, within the jurisdiction of Sanjay Nagar P.S., and thereafter the accused picked up quarrel with CW.1 without any reason and ill- treated CW.1 with cruelty both physically and mentally, abused CW.1 in filthy language knowingly such insult will provoke breach of peace and threatened CW.1 with dire consequences thus committed criminal intimidation and thereby committed the alleged offence.

3. Accused is on bail. Copies of the charge sheet papers were furnished to the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge read over to them. Prosecution examined PW:1 and got marked Ex.P.1 and 2. Since there is no incriminating evidence statement has been dispensed with.

4. Heard arguments from both the sides .

5. The points that arise for determination are as follows:

1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that accused married CW.1 prior to 10 years in accordance with customs and they were together residing at House No.59, Veterinary College Quarters, within the jurisdiction of Sanjay Nagar P.S., and thereafter the accused picked up quarrel with CW.1 4 C.C. NO. 23024/2015 without any reason and ill-

treated CW.1 with cruelty both physically and mentally, abused CW.1 in filthy language knowingly such insult will provoke breach of peace and threatened CW.1 with dire consequences thus committed criminal intimidation and thereby committed the offence punishable U/sec.498(A), 504, 506 of IPC.?

2. What order?

6. The Answer to the above points are as follows:

Point No.1 In the negative Point No.2 As per final order for the following:

REASONS

7. Point No.1:-

In order to bring home the guilt of accused, the prosecution has examined PW.1, who has turned hostile to 5 C.C. NO. 23024/2015 the case of the prosecution. PW.1 being the complainant in her evidence deposed that accused is her husband and he has not ill - treated her, not abused her in filthy language and not threatened her. PW.1 further deposed that, due to minor difference between herself and accused she had been to the police station, where the police took her signatures on 2 documents i.e, complaint Ex.P.1 and mahazar Ex.P2. But, in the cross examination PW.1 has deposed that she has compromised the matter with the accused and she doesn't wish to continue the proceedings against the accused. When the material witnesses/complainant herself turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case, the prayer of Sr.APP for summoning other witnesses has been rejected and side closed. There is no incriminating evidence against the accused. Therefore, point no.1 is answered in the negative.

8. Point No.2:- In the result, the following order is passed:

ORDER Acting under Section-248(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused is hereby acquitted of the offence punishable U/sec.498(A), 504, 506 of IPC.

Bail bond of accused and his surety bond stands cancelled.

(Dictated to the stenographer, transcript thereof, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court this the 15th day of December 2016.) (Mohamed Ashraf Aris) VIII Addl.C.M.M. Bengaluru.

Annexure:

1.List of Witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution: P. Ws:

1. Suma.

2.List of Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:- Ex.Ps:

1. Complaint

2. Mahazar.

3.List of Material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:- -NIL-

4.List of witnesses and documents marked on behalf of the accused:- - NIL -

VIII Addl. C. M. M. Bengaluru. 7 C.C. NO. 23024/2015 8 C.C. NO. 23024/2015 Judgment pronounced in the open court. (vide separate order) ORDER Acting under Section-248(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused is hereby acquitted of the offence punishable U/sec.498(A), 504, 506 of IPC.

Bail bond of accused and his surety bond stands cancelled.

VIII Addl.C.M.M. Bengaluru.