Bangalore District Court
The State Of Karnataka Through vs Bharath on 2 March, 2020
0
IN THE COURT OF XXIV ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF MARCH 2020
C.C.No.23224/12
Present: SRI. BALAGOPALAKRISHNA.
XXIV ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
COMPLAINANT : The State of Karnataka through
Hanumanthanagar Police Station
(State by Sr. A.P.P.)
V/s.
Accused 1. Bharath, s/o.Lokesh, 20yrs, R/at.No.4,
Dobhighat, Nanjappa block, Madiwalamachi
quarters, K.G.Nagar, Bangalore.
2. Manja @ Koli Manja, s/o.Puttaswamy, 20 yrs,
R/at.Sanyasi hut quarters, K.G.Nagar,
Bangalore.
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT OF : 15/07/12
OFFENCE
DATE OF ARREST OF THE : Accused No.1 and 2 are on bail.
ACCUSED
OFFENCES ALLEGED : U/s.323, 324, 504 r/w.34 of IPC
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT OF : 27/02/20
EVIDENCE
DATE OF CLOSING OF : 27/02/20
1
EVIDENCE
OPINION OF THE JUDGE : Accused No.1 and 2 found not
guilty
(Balagopalakrishna.)
XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT
The PSI of Hanumanthanagar Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused for the offence punishable U/s. 323, 324, 504 r/w.34 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under:
It is the case of the prosecution that, on 15/7/12 at about 9.30 pm., the CW 1 was proceeding on his motor cycle to go to his house, when he was going infront of Akshaya Ice Cream parlour, Maruthi circle, Pipeline, Hanumanthanagar, the accused persons having common intention in furtherance of the same, abused the CW 1 in a filthy word saying there is a rainy go slow, as a reply the CW 1 told that I am going slow what is the problem, having enraged the same, accused No.1 and 2 abused the CW 1 in a filthy word saying are you giving answer to us and in the quarrel, accused No.1 took the knife and stabbed on his right ribs and umbilical cord area and caused injury and in the quarrel accused No.2 assaulted CW 1 on his face and chest and thereby accused has committed an offence punishable U/s.323, 324, 504 r/w.34 of IPC. 2
3. In pursuance of the complaint given by the complainant by name Krishnamurthy, the Police have registered crime in Cr.No.215/12 for the offence punishable U/s. 323, 324, 504 r/w.34 of IPC. After conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed charge sheet against the accused for the said offence.
4. This court has taken cognizance for the offence punishable U/s.323, 324, 504 r/w.34 of IPC and issued summons to the accused and accused are on bail.
5. The copy of the charge sheet and other material documents has been supplied to the accused as required U/s. 207 of Cr.P.C.
6. Heard before framing charge and charges were framed for the offence punishable U/s. 323, 324, 504 r/w.34 of IPC and read over and explained to the accused persons in the language known to them. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.
7. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution has got examined complainant as PW.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 3. The prayer of the Sr. A.P.P. to issue summons to other charge sheeted witness has been rejected by this court on the ground that, PW.1 being complainant/victim/material witness have turned hostile to the case of the prosecution and no purpose would be served if the remaining charge sheeted witnesses are examined.
3
8. Since there was no incriminating evidence found in the evidence of prosecution, the statement as required U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C., is dispensed with. No defense evidence on the side of the Accused.
9. Heard both side.
10. The following point arises for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on 15/7/12 at about 9.30 pm., the CW 1 was proceeding on his motor cycle to go to his house, when he was going infront of Akshaya Ice Cream parlour, Maruthi circle, Pipeline, Hanumanthanagar, the accused persons having common intention in furtherance of the same, abused the CW 1 in a filthy word saying there is a rainy go slow, as a reply the CW 1 told that I am going slow what is the problem, having enraged the same, accused No.1 and 2 abused the CW 1 in a filthy word saying are you giving answer to us and in the quarrel, accused No.1 took the knife and stabbed on his right ribs and umbilical cord area and caused injury and in the quarrel accused No.2 assaulted CW 1 on his face and chest and thereby accused has committed an offence punishable U/s.323, 324, 504 r/w.34 of IPC ?
2. What order?
11. My answer to the above points is as under;
Point No.1 In the Negative.
4 Point No.2As per final order for the following;
REASONS
12. POINT NO.1 :
The prosecution in order to prove the guilt against the accused, the complainant himself examined as PW.1, in his examination in chief itself he has turned hostile to the case of the prosecution denying that, on 15/7/12 at about 9.30 pm., the accused persons abused him in a filthy word, accused No.1 took the knife and stabbed on his right ribs and umbilical cord area and caused injury and in the quarrel accused No.2 assaulted him on his face and chest, but deposed that, since there was trivial dispute among him and the accused he has given complaint, same is marked at Ex.P.1 and signature at Ex.P1(a) and claimed his ignorance to say the contents of the same. He further denied that as shown by him, the police were drawn mahazar in his presence, but admitted his signature found on the mahazar, same is marked at Ex.P.2 and signature at Ex.P2(a) and claimed his ignorance to say the contents of the same.
At request of learned senior APP this witness has been treated as hostile witness and permission was accorded to cross examine him. In the cross examination the learned Sr.APP suggested the case of the prosecution same is denied by the witness. In view of the above facts and circumstances this court has denied to issue summons to other charge sheeted witness since no purpose will be served. 5
13. On the basis of the above evidence of PW.1 the court cannot come to conclusion that, on 15/7/12 at about 9.30 pm., the accused persons abused the CW 1 in a filthy word, accused No.1 took the knife and stabbed on his right ribs and umbilical cord area and caused injury and in the quarrel accused No.2 assaulted CW 1 on his face and chest. If really there was any incident, definitely the PW.1 should have given evidence on par with the avernments made in the complaint. Here the PW.1 turned hostile, in the cross examination he has categorically admitted that, he and accused have compromised the matter. That is the reason why PW.1 has not given any evidence supporting the case of the prosecution. Under such circumstances the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the guilt against the accused and in my opinion it is a fit case to extend benefit of doubt to the accused. Accordingly point under reference answered in the Negative.
14. POINT NO.2 :
For the aforesaid reason and discussion, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. Accused NO.1 and 2 are hereby acquitted for the offence punishable U/s.323, 324, 504 r/w.34 of IPC. They are set at liberty.The bail bond executed by the accused No. 1 and 2
are stands cancelled. However, Accused No.1 and 2 shall execute personal bond of Rs.50,000/ each by 6 undertaking to appear before the appellate Court, if any appeal is filed.
It is not a fit case to award victim compensation as provided U/s.357(1) of Cr.P.C.
Property seized in PF.No.151/2012, dtd: 27/7/12 is confiscated to the Government, office is directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law after the appeal period is over.
(Dictated to the stenographer, script transcribed by her and then corrected directly on computer and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 2nd day of March 2020).
(Balagopalakrishna) XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the Prosecution:
PW1 : Krishnamurthy Documents marked for the Prosecution: Ex.P1 : Complaint Ex.P1(a) : Signature Ex.P2 : Spot mahazar Ex.P2(a) : Signature Ex.P3 : Statement of PW 1 7
Witnesses examined for the accused: NIL Documents marked for the accused: NIL (Balagopalakrishna) XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.