Bangalore District Court
The State Of Karnataka Through vs Venkatesh on 28 May, 2020
1
IN THE COURT OF XXIV ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF MAY 2020
C.C.No.9828/13
Present: SRI. BALAGOPALAKRISHNA.
XXIV ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
COMPLAINANT : The State of Karnataka through
Chamarajpet Police Station
(State by Sr. A.P.P.)
V/s.
Accused Venkatesh, s/o.late.Lakshmaiah, 42 yrs,
R/at.No.91, I main, 9th cross, Chamarajpet,
Bangalore.
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT OF : 12/1/11 onwards
OFFENCE
DATE OF ARREST OF THE : Accused is on bail.
ACCUSED
OFFENCES ALLEGED : U/s.420 of IPC and U/s.506,
504, 332 r/w.34 of IPC..3, 4
&5 of Price Chit and Money
Scheme (Banning) Act 1978
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT OF : ---
2
EVIDENCE
DATE OF CLOSING OF : ----
EVIDENCE
OPINION OF THE JUDGE : Accused found not guilty
(Balagopalakrishna.)
XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT
The PSI of Chamarajpet Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused for the offence punishable U/s.420 of IPC and sec.3, 4 and 5 of Price Chit and Money Schemes (Banning) Act of 1978.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under:
It is the case of the prosecution that, the accused was running Vigneshwara Enterprises at No.139, 8 th cross, I main, Chamarajpet, wherein from 12/1/11 he has started unauthorized chit business and collected Rs.2000/, Rs.4000/, Rs.5000/, Rs.6000/ and Rs.10000/ till 12/5/12 from CW 1 to 36 and failed to repay the chit amount to the members i.e., CW 1 to 36 amounting to Rs.50,12,000/ and deceived the public, thus accused has committed the offence punishable U/s.420 of IPC and sec.3, 4 and 5 of Price Chit and Money Schemes (Banning) Act of 1978.
3
3. In pursuance of the complaint given by the complainant by name Mallikarjuna, the Police have registered crime in Cr.No.243/12 for the offence punishable U/s.420 of IPC and sec.3, 4 and 5 of Price Chit and Money Schemes (Banning) Act of 1978. After conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable U/s.420 of IPC and sec.3, 4 and 5 of Price Chit and Money Schemes (Banning) Act of 1978.
4. This court has taken cognizance for the offence punishable U/s. 420 of IPC and sec.3, 4 and 5 of Price Chit and Money Schemes (Banning) Act of 1978 and issued summons to the accused. Accused is 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 charge was framed for the offence punishable U/s. 420 of IPC and sec.3, 4 and 5 of Price Chit and Money Schemes (Banning) Act of 1978 and read over and explained to the accused in the language known to him. Accused is pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.
7. In order to prove the case of the prosecution sufficient opportunity was given to examine the CW.1 to 38, but inspite of coercive steps i.e., NBW and Proclamation prosecution has not secured the presence of CW.1 to 38, hence their evidence was dropped. Accused are 4 appearing before the court regularly, hence the prayer of the APP to issue summons to other witnesses was rejected on the ground that, victim themselves is not secured and no purpose would be served if other witnesses are examined.
8. Since the prosecution has not examined any of the witnesses, the question of recording the statement of the accused as required U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C., does not arise and same 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, the accused was running Vigneshwara Enterprises at No.139, 8th cross, I main, Chamarajpet, wherein from 12/1/11 he has started unauthorized chit business and collected Rs.2000/, Rs.4000/, Rs.5000/, Rs.6000/ and Rs.10000/ till 12/5/12 from CW 1 to 36 and failed to repay the chit amount to the members i.e., CW 1 to 36 amounting to Rs.50,12,000/ and deceived the public, thus accused has committed the offence punishable U/s.420 of IPC and sec.3, 4 and 5 of Price Chit and Money Schemes (Banning) Act of 1978 ?
2. What order?
11. My answer to the above points is as under; 5 Point No.1 In the Negative.
Point No.2 As per final order for the following;
REASONS
12. POINT NO.1 :
It is the case of the prosecution that, the accused was running Vigneshwara Enterprises at No.139, 8 th cross, I main, Chamarajpet, wherein from 12/1/11 he has started unauthorized chit business and collected Rs.2000/, Rs.4000/, Rs.5000/, Rs.6000/ and Rs.10000/ till 12/5/12 from CW 1 to 36 and failed to repay the chit amount to the members i.e., CW 1 to 36 amounting to Rs.50,12,000/ and deceived the public. Thus burden is heavily cost upon the prosecution to prove the said aspect. In order to prove the same the prosecution has not examined the CW.1 to 38. In spite of sufficient opportunity given to the prosecution has failed to secure the complainant by name Sri.Mallikarjuna to speak about above allegations made in the complaint and his evidence was dropped. Therefore, what ever the allegations made in the complaint is left unproved. Likewise the material witness that is CW.2 to 38 is also not secured by the prosecution. After framing the charge for the aforesaid offence this court has issued summons to complaint and other material witnesses i.e., CW.2 to 38 on several times and proclamation has also been taken to secure the presence of CW.2 to 38, but they are not secured and dropped. Thus prosecution has not examined any of the witnesses cited in the charge sheet inspite of sufficient opportunity. Therefore their evidence has been dropped.
6
13. As stated above CW.2 to38 have not been examined. Non examination of the complainant and material witness and other witnesses is fatal to the case of the prosecution to prove the guilt against the accused. Thus it is very clear that, the prosecution has failed to establish the alleged offence against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Thus 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 U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. Accused is hereby acquitted for the offence punishable U/s.420 of IPC and sec.3, 4 and 5 of Price Chit and Money Schemes (Banning) Act of 1978. He is set at liberty.
The Bail bond executed by the accused is hereby stands cancelled. However, accused shall execute personal bond of Rs.50,000/ by undertaking to appear before the appellate Court, if any appeal is filed. 7 It is not a fit case to award victim compensation as provided u/S.357(1) of Cr.P.C. (Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by him and corrected and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 28th day of May 2020).
(Balagopalakrishna) XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
ANNEXURES Witnesses examined for the Prosecution:
NIL Documents marked for the Prosecution:
NIL Witnesses examined for the accused: NIL Documents marked for the accused: NIL (Balagopalakrishna) XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.