Bangalore District Court
State By Mahadevapura Police vs Adakala Meri Selvi @ Selvi on 4 March, 2020
IN THE COURT OF THE XXIX ADDL.C.M.M MAYO HALL UNIT,
BENGALURU
Dated: This the 4th Day of March 2020
PRESENT: Sri. G.R.KULKARNI,
B.A.(LAW)., LL.B.,
XXIX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bengaluru.
C.C.NO. 51314/2016
COMPLAINANT :- State by Mahadevapura Police
(By Sr.APP)
ACCUSED Adakala Meri Selvi @ Selvi
W/o. Dilip
Aged 42 Years
R/at. No.18/1, Near Cauvery Water
Tank, Muniswamappa Layout,
A.Narayanapuara, Bengaluru.
(By Sri.B.K.Ramesh., Advocate )
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT OF 12.03.2018
EVIDENCE
DATE OF CLOSING OF 14.01.2020
EVIDENCE
DATE OF JUDGMENT 04.03.2020
JUDGMENT
This is a final report filed by the PSI of Mahadevapura P.S. against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code R/w. Section 76 of Chits Funds Act, 1982 and Section 3, 4, 5 of Price Chits Funds and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978.
2 CC.No.51314/20162. BRIEF FACTS:-
The case of prosecution is that at No.18/1 Venkatappa Line, A.Narayanapura within the jurisdictional limits of Mahadevapura police station the accused is found running the chit funds unauthorizedly with an intention to make unlawful gain to herself by committing cheating.
3. On the first information given by the CW-1, the police have registered the case, investigation was conducted and after completion of the investigation final report filed against the accused.
4. The accused has entered appearance in response to the summons and has been enlarged on bail. The prosecution papers has been supplied to the accused. After hearing, the charge against the accused was framed to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. The prosecution has examined PW.1 to PW.4 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P5. The statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., was recorded wherein he denied the incriminating circumstances as false. The accused submits no defence.
6. Heard both sides.
7. The following points arise for my consideration.
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that at No.18/1 Venkatappa Line, A.Narayanapura within the jurisdictional limits of Mahadevapura police station the accused is found running the chit funds unauthorizedly with an intention to make unlawful gain to herself by committing cheating thereby committed an offence punishable u/s. 420 of Indian Penal Code R/w.
3 CC.No.51314/2016Section 76 if Chits Funds Act 1982 and Section 3, 4, 5 of Price Chits Funds and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act 1978?
2. What order?
8. My answer to the above points as under :-
Point No.1 - In the Negative
Point No.2 - As per final order for the
following
REASONS
9. Point No.1 :-
In the instant case PW.1 who is complainant in this case has initially supported the case of the prosecution and has testified that at No.18/1 Venkatappa Line, A.Narayanapura the accused is running the chit funds unauthorizedly with an intention to make unlawful gain to herself and has committing cheating. He has lodged the complaint as per Ex.P1. He has given statement to the police in this regard. However subsequently PW-1 has compromised with the accused and on his further examination has stated that he is not interested to proceed with the case against the accused. He has been partly treated as hostile and cross-examined by the Ld.Sr.APP wherein nothing substantial has been elicited in support of it case.
10. PW-2 to PW-4 who are the members of the chit funds have also initially supported the case of the prosecution but during their further examination have stated that they have compromised with the accused and not interested to prosecute this case.
11. This Court was of the opinion that PW.1 to PW-4 are the material witnesses who have turned hostile and therefore the 4 CC.No.51314/2016 remaining witnesses were dropped by rejecting the prayer of Ld.Sr.APP.
12. On considering the evidence of PW.1 to PW-4 and the complaint at Ex.P1 and the statement at Ex.P2 to Ex.P5, the evidence of PW.1 to PW-4 appears to be contradictory. The evidence of PW.1 to PW-4 is not inconsonance with Ex.P1 to PW-5. PW.1 to PW-4 have admitted to have compromised with the accused. The prosecution is unable to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Since there is nothing incriminating against the accused, the only inference that could be drawn is that the accused is innocent of the offences leveled against him. Hence the accused deserves to be acquitted. Therefore I answer point No.1 in the NEGATIVE.
13. Point No.2 : For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C. accused is hereby ACQUITTED for the offence punishable u/s. 420 of Indian Penal Code R/w. Section 76 if Chits Funds Act 1982 and Section 3, 4, 5 of Price Chits Funds and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act 1978.
The bail bond of the accused and that of his surety stands cancelled.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on the computer, same is corrected and then pronounced in open Court on this the 4th day of March 2020) (G.R.Kulkarni) XXIX ACMM, BENGALURU 5 CC.No.51314/2016 ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION PW-1 Govindamma PW-2 Anitha PW-3 Papamma PW-4 Shanti LIST OF EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION Ex.P.1 Complaint Ex.P.1(a) Signature of PW-1 Ex.P.2 Statement of PW-1 Ex.P.3 Statement of PW-3 Ex.P.4 Statement of PW-4 Ex.P.5 Statement of PW-3 LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS GOT MARKED :-
NIL (G.R.Kulkarni) XXIX ACMM, BENGALURU 6 CC.No.51314/2016 04.03.2020 State by APP Accused For Judgment (Vide separate order pronounced in the Open Court) ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C. accused is hereby ACQUITTED for the offence punishable u/s. 420 of Indian Penal Code R/w. Section 76 if Chits Funds Act 1982 and Section 3, 4, 5 of Price Chits Funds and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act 1978.
The bail bond of the accused and that of his surety stands cancelled.
XXIX ACMM