Bangalore District Court
4. Name Of The 1) Babu @ Babu Rao Kadam vs S/O. Late Lakshman Rao 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. 5435/2013
JUDGMENT U/S 355 OF THE Cr.P.C. 1973.
1. Sl. No. of the Case 5435/2013
2. The date of 27/12/2012
commission of the
offence
3. Name of the State by Sheshadripuram P.S.
complainant
4. Name of the 1) Babu @ Babu Rao Kadam,
accused S/o. late Lakshman Rao, 41
years, No.10/2, Dattatreya
Temple Road, 8th Cross, P.G.
Halli Main Road,
Malleshwaram, Bengaluru.
2) Smt.Bharathi.S @ Bharathi
Bai, 33 years, No.10/2,
Dattatreya Temple Road, 8th
Cross, P.G. Halli Main Road,
Malleshwaram, Bengaluru.
5. The offence U/sec.323, 324, 326 r/w 34 of
complained of or IPC.
proved
2 C.C. NO. 5435/2013
6. Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
and his
examination
7. Final Order Acting U/sec. 248(1) Cr.PC
Accused -1 and 2 are acquitted.
8. Date of such order 15/12/2016
For the following:-
JUDGMENT
This is the charge sheet filed by the PSI, Sheshadripuram P.S. against the accused-1 and 2 for the offence punishable U/sec.323, 324, 326 r/w 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that:
On 27/12/2012 at about 7 p.m. accused-1 and 2 in furtherance of common intention to commit an offence proceeded to CW.1's House bearing No.10/2, situaed at Malleshwaram 8th Cross, Dattatreya Temple Road, within jurisdiction of Sheshadripuram police station., and picked up quarrel with CW.1 with regard to property matter and in the above said transaction assaulted CW.1 with their hands thus voluntarily caused hurt and assaulted 3 C.C. NO. 5435/2013 with wooden repiece on the trunk of CW.1 thereby caused bleeding injuries and forcefully pushed CW.1 on the ground subsequently CW.1's right thigh bone was broken thereby caused grievous hurt and thereby and committed the alleged offence.
3. Accused- 1 and 2 are on bail. Copies of the charge sheet papers were furnished to the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge read over to him. Prosecution examined PW:1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 3 and MO-1. Accused has been questioned u/sec. 313 of Cr.PC., accused has not led any defence evidence.
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 on 27/12/2012 at about 4 C.C. NO. 5435/2013 7 p.m. accused-1 and 2 in furtherance of common intention to commit an offence proceeded to CW.1's House bearing No.10/2, situaed at Malleshwaram 8th Cross, Dattatreya Temple Road, within jurisdiction of Sheshadripuram police station., and picked up quarrel with CW.1 with regard to property matter and in the above said transaction assaulted CW.1 with their hands thus voluntarily caused hurt and assaulted with wooden repiece on the trunk of CW.1 thereby caused bleeding injuries and forcefully pushed CW.1 on the ground subsequently CW.1's right thigh bone was broken thereby caused grievous hurt and thereby committed the 5 C.C. NO. 5435/2013 offence punishable U/sec.323, 324, 326 r/w 34 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. PW.1 being the PSI in his evidence deposed that he has received information from Manipal North Side Hospital, regarding medico-legal case and thereafter he sent their beat PC to the hospital and recorded statement and brought it to police station. He has further stated that he registered the case and sent FIR to the court as per Ex.P2 and on the next day he went to the spot and drew mahazar in the presence of CW.5 and 6 as per Ex.P3 and seized the wooden strip marked as 6 C.C. NO. 5435/2013 MO-1. He further deposed that he deputed CW.8 to 10 to trace out the accused and accordingly they produced the accused-1 and 2 before him. He has stated that he recorded further statement of CW.1 and statements of CW.3 and 4 and collected wound certificate from Doctor and after completion of investigation, he has filed the charge sheet against the accused-1 and 2.
8. Except the evidence of PW.1, none of the aggrieved persons including the complainant have appeared before the court to give evidence. As such, the evidence of PW.1 become formal in the absence of corroborative evidence and his evidence alone is not sufficient to establish the guilt of accused.
9. In the absence of cogent, material and corroborative evidence of complainant, it is not safe to come to conclusion that prosecution has proved the guilt of 7 C.C. NO. 5435/2013 accused. Therefore, point no.1 is answered in the negative.
10. Point No.2:- In the result, the following order is passed:
ORDER Acting under Section-248(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused-1 and 2 are hereby acquitted of the offence punishable U/sec.323, 324, 326 r/w 34 of IPC.
Bail bonds of accused and their surety bonds stand cancelled.
Seized property i.e., MO-1 being worthless, ordered to be destroyed after appeal period is over. (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. Madhusudhan.R. 8 C.C. NO. 5435/2013
2.List of Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:- Ex.Ps:
1. Statement
2. FIR
3. Mahazar.
3.List of Material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:-
MO-1: Wooden Strip.
4.List of witnesses and documents marked on behalf of the accused:- - NIL -
VIII Addl. C. M. M. Bengaluru.
9 C.C. NO. 5435/201310 C.C. NO. 5435/2013 Judgment pronounced in the open court. (vide separate order) ORDER Acting under Section-248(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused-1 and 2 are hereby acquitted of the offence punishable U/sec.323, 324, 326 r/w 34 of IPC.
Bail bonds of accused and their surety bonds stand cancelled.
Seized property i.e., MO-1 being worthless, ordered to be destroyed after appeal period is over.
VIII Addl.C.M.M. Bengaluru.