Bangalore District Court
State By Ramamurthynagar vs Started Ill-Treating C.W.1 By ... on 20 April, 2022
IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL.CMM: BENGALURU
Dated this the 20th day of April 2022
Present: Shri Anand T Chavan, B.Com., LL.B(Spl.).
I Addl. C.M.M BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT U/s. 355 Cr.P.C.,
Case No. : C.C.No.31340/2021
Date of Offence : 1-9-2017 to 6-3-2020
Name of complainant : State by Ramamurthynagar
Police Station, Bengaluru.
(By Learned Sr. APP)
Name of accused : R.Prashanth Kumar
S/o late Ramaswamy Reddy,
aged 30 years, R/o No.154,
10th cross, Bhuvaneshwari
Layout, Munekolalu,
Marathhalli, Bengaluru.
(By Shri S.G.Muniswamy Gowda,
Advocate)
Offences complained off: U/s. 498(A), 504, 506 of IPC,
u/s 3 & 4 of D.P. Act and
u/s 66(D) of I.T. Act.
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Accused is acquitted
Date of Order : 20-4-2022
2 C.C.No.31340/2021
JUDGMENT
The Police Inspector, Ramamurthynagar P.S has filed charge sheet against accused for offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 504, 506 of IPC, Sec.3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Sec.66(D) of Information Technology Act.
2. Brief facts of prosecution case are that C.W.1 married accused at SKR Kalyana Mantap of Kundalahalli Gate, Bengaluru on 31-8-2017. Thereafter C.W.1 joined accused in her matrimonial house situated at Munikolalu. After some days accused started ill-treating C.W.1 by demanding dowry to buy a car. The accused ill-treated C.W.1 physically and mentally by demanding dowry. Further when C.W.1 went to house of C.W.4 i.e., her father, the accused came to said house, he picked up quarrel with her and threatened her if she fails to bring dowry. Further accused abused C.W.1 3 C.C.No.31340/2021 in filthy language. It is further alleged that accused crated a fake Facebook account and uploaded nude photos of C.W.1 with an intention to insult and humiliate her. Thereafter on 7-3-2020 C.W.1 lodged first information before Ramamurthynagar PS. Said police registered the case in their PS Cr.No.111/2020 and issued FIR. After recording statements of material witnesses and after conclusion of investigation, I.O. has filed charge sheet against accused for above offences.
3. After filing of this charge sheet, cognizance of above offences is taken and summons is issued. Accused appeared in pursuant to summons and he is enlarged on bail. Copy of charge sheet furnished to accused u/s 207 of Cr.P.C and charge is framed. Accused has not pleaded guilt of alleged offences and he has claimed to be tried.
4. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined 1 witness as P.W.1 and 4 C.C.No.31340/2021 got marked 2 documents as per Exs.P1 and P2. However, statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. is dispensed with as there is no incriminating evidence against accused.
5. On the basis of charge sheet allegation, the following points arose for consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 498(A) of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 504 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 506 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act?5 C.C.No.31340/2021
5. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 66(D) of Information Technology Act?
6. What order ?
6. Heard arguments. Perused oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution.
7. The following are findings to above points.
Point No.1 to 5: In the Negative Point No.6 : As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
8. Point No.1 to 5:- These points are taken together for consideration as findings on one point have bearing on other points.
9. In support of its case, prosecution has got examined C.W.1/first informant-cum-victim of the case by name Navya D/o Suresh as P.W.1 and she has stated that the accused was her husband and 6 C.C.No.31340/2021 now they are divorced. However, she has completely turned hostile by testifying that the accused has never ill-treated her, he never threatened her with deadly consequences and he has never abused her in filthy language. She has further stated that accused has never demanded and received any dowry from herself and her parents and he has not uploaded her nude photos in Facebook or other social media platform. Though PW.1 has identified first information lodged by her as per Ex.P1, spot mahazar said to have been conducted by police as per Ex.P2 and her signatures on said documents as per Ex.P1(a) and Ex.P2(a), she has stated that she signed said documents as per request of police, when she had been to police station due to differences with accused. She has further stated that she does not know the contents of said documents.
7 C.C.No.31340/2021
10. Though P.W.1 is treated as hostile witness and cross-examined at length by learned APP, nothing worth while is elicited from her mouth in order to prove that accused has ill-treated her, he demanded dowry, he threatened her, he abused her and he uploaded her nude photos to Facebook as per case of prosecution.
11. Hence in view of hostile evidence of aforesaid principal witness, rest of prosecution witnesses are dropped as no purpose of prosecution will be served by examining them. Hence absolutely there is nothing on record to prove that accused has committed alleged offences. Hence in view of above reasons, the evidence of prosecution witness has not inspired the confidence of the Court with regard to alleged guilt of accused and as such it is incumbent upon this Court to hold that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused has committed offences punishable under 8 C.C.No.31340/2021 Sections 498(A), 504, 506 of IPC, u/s 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and u/s 66(D) of Information Technology Act. Hence, Point No.1 to 5 are answered in Negative.
12. Point No.6: -
For the reasons stated and findings given on point No.1 to 5, following is:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 504, 506 of IPC, u/s 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and u/s 66(D) of Information Technology Act.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stand canceled automatically.
( Typed by me directly on computer, revised, corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 20 th day of April 2022).
(Anand T Chavan) st 1 Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.9 C.C.No.31340/2021
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for prosecution :-
P.W.1, Smt.Navya;
List of exhibits marked for prosecution :-
Ex.P1, Complaint,
Ex.P1(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P2, Spot mahazar,
Ex.P2(a), Signature of P.W.1;
List of material object :
NIL
List of witnesses examined for defence:-
NIL List of documents marked for defence:-
NIL 1st Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.10 C.C.No.31340/2021
20-04-2022 State by Sr.APP Accused C/B For Judgment (Judgment pronounced in the Open Court) ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 504, 506 of IPC, u/s 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and u/s 66(D) of Information Technology Act.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stand canceled automatically.
ACMM, Bengaluru.