Bangalore District Court
State By Yelahanka New Town vs Bharath Kumar on 14 September, 2021
IN THE COURT OF THE 30TH ADDL.CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 14th day of September, 2021
:Present: Sri. I.P.Naik, B.A., LL.B.(Spl),
30th ACMM, Bengaluru
Judgment U/s.355 of Cr.P.C.
C.C.No. 11312/2019
Date of Offence 20.09.2018
Complainant State by Yelahanka New Town, Police
Station
V/s.
Accused
Bharath Kumar,
S/o.Veerabhadraswamy,
Aged about 19 years,
R/at.IVRI Road,
Ramagondanahalli,
Singanayakanahalli Post,
Bengaluru North Taluk.
Offences U/s. 326 IPC.
Plea Recorded on:27.01.2020 and accused
Pleaded not guilty.
313 Statement recorded on: Dispensed with
Final Oder Accused is acquitted
Date of Order 14-09-2021
*****
2 C.C.No.11312/2019
JUDGMENT
The PSI of Yelahanka New Town, Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused for the offences punishable U/s. 326 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
It is alleged that, on account of CW2's birthday, CW1 to 4 decided to celebrate the birthday party at CW4's house situated at Ramagondanahalli, Yelahanka Upanagara, within the territorial limits of Yelahanka Upanagara Police Station. Further, CW1 to 4 were partying by consuming alcohol, at that time, accused being neighbor of CW4 came into the house of CW4 picked up quarrel and assaulted CW1 with tiles on his left ear, left nose and lower abdomen and caused severe bleeding injuries and thereby committed the aforesaid offences. In this regard, CW1 lodged complaint before the jurisdictional police. During the course of investigation, I.O. visited the place of incident, drawn spot mahazar in the presence of the witnesses, recorded the statement of witnesses and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against accused for the aforesaid offences.
3. On the basis of charge sheet and other materials cognizance taken and case is registered against accused.
3 C.C.No.11312/2019
4. The copies of the prosecution papers have been furnished to the accused as required under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C.
5. The charge is framed, contents of charge have been read over and explained to the accused in the language known to him, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, hence, the prosecution is called upon to prove its case.
6. In order to prove the guilt of the accused persons, prosecution has examined 1 witness as PW1 and got marked 2 documents as Ex.P.1 & P.2. Even though cross-examining the PW1 by the prosecution, by treating hostile witnesses, nothing worth is brought from the mouth of PW1 to prove the guilt of the accused. In case, if the remaining witnesses are examined, no purpose will be served. Hence, prayer of the learned Sr.APP is rejected and other remaining witnesses are dropped. Further, recording of statement of accused U/s.313 of Cr.P.C is dispensed with.
7. Heard both the side and perused the material evidence on record.
8. The following points would arise for my consideration: 4 C.C.No.11312/2019
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on account of CW2's birthday, CW1 to 4 decided to celebrate the birthday party at CW4's house situated at Ramagondanahalli, Yelahanka Upanagara, within the territorial limits of Yelahanka Upanagara Police Station. Further, CW1 to 4 were partying by consuming alcohol, at that time, accused being neighbor of CW4 came into the house of CW4 picked up quarrel and assaulted CW1 with tiles on his left ear, left nose and lower abdomen and caused severe bleeding injuries and thereby committed an offence punishable U/s.326 of IPC?
2. What order.?
9. My findings on the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.2 : As per final order
......................... for the following.., REASONS
10. Point No.1:- According to prosecution case, PW1 being the main and direct witnesses to the alleged incident, has not supported the prosecution case. Even though the learned Sr.APP has cross-examined them by treating hostile, no material is brought from the mouth of PW1. 5 C.C.No.11312/2019
11. After recording ocular evidence of PW1, the learned Sr.APP prays for issuance of summons to other remaining witnesses. In this case, the main witnesses have not supported the prosecution, hence, re-issuing summons, NBW and proclamation to the other remaining witnesses will not serve any purpose. Therefore, prayer of the learned Sr.APP is rejected and statement of the accused U/s.313 of Cr.P.C is dispensed with. By considering ocular evidence of PW1 this court held that, prosecution has utterly failed to prove the guilt of the accused persons. Accordingly, Point No.1 is answered in the Negative.
12. Point No.2: In view of the Negative findings on the above point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER The Powers confirmed upon me U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused is acquitted of the alleged offences punishable U/s.326 of IPC.
The bail bond of accused person and surety extended for further 6 months in order to comply Sec.437 (a) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, this bail bond automatically stands cancelled.6 C.C.No.11312/2019
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, hence, granting of compensation of U/s.357 of Cr.P.C. is declined.
(Dictated to the Stenographer through computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 14th day of September, 2021).
(I.P Naik.) 30 A.C.M.M., B'lore.
th ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
P.W. 1 : Hanumantharaya
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 : Complaint
Ex.P.2 : Mahazar
3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE NIL
4. LIST OF THE METERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION NIL (I.P.Naik) 30th Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
7 C.C.No.11312/2019Judgment pronounced in Open Court vide separate:-
ORDER The Powers confirmed upon me U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused is acquitted of the alleged offences punishable U/s.326 of IPC.
The bail bond of accused person and surety extended for further 6 months in order to comply Sec.437 (a) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, this bail bond automatically stands cancelled.
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, hence, granting of compensation of U/s.357 of Cr.P.C. is declined.
(I.P.Naik) 30th Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.8 C.C.No.11312/2019