Bangalore District Court
Gangamuniyappa Hc 5576 vs Manjur Rehaman @ Dun on 24 January, 2024
KABC030443942022
Digitally signed by
R R MAHESHA
MAHESHA Date: 2024.02.03
12:14:06 +0530
IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, AT BENGALURU.
Dated this the 24 th day of January 2024
Present : R.Mahesha,
B.A.L., LLB.,
IX Addl.C.M.M. Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT U/SEC.355 OF CR.P.C.
1.C.C.No. 16933/2022
2.Date of Offence 23/02/2022
3.Complainant State by R.R Nagar Police
Station.
4.Accused Mansoor @ Rehman Mansoor
S/o Late Abdul Basheer, 34
years, No.50, Venkatappa Road,
Queens road, 2nd cross road,
Shivajinagar, Bangalore.
2 CC No.16933/2022
5.Offences complained of u/Sec.229(A) of IPC.
6.Plea Accused pleaded not guilty.
7.Final Order Accused is convicted
8.Date of Order 24/01/2024.
REASONS
The Police Inspector of S.R Nagar Police Station,
Bengaluru has filed charge sheet against the accused for
the offences punishable U/Sec. 229(A) of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that, the
present accused is accused in Crime No.97/2020 for the
offence punishable u/sec.394 , 201 r/w 34 of IPC on the file
of S.R. Nagara Police Station Bangalore. Hon'ble 9 th ACMM
has issued NBW against this accused in CC.4207/2021. The
accused has appeared before 9th ACMM and got enlarged on
3 CC No.16933/2022
bail with some conditions. After that the present accused
has violates the bail conditions and not yet turned up before
9th ACMM. Further it is the case of the prosecution is that
the Hon'ble 9th ACMM has enlarged accused in
CC.NO.1779/2022 . In this case also accused violates the
bail conditions and not yet appeared before 9 th ACMM.
Therefore CW.1 lodged his report before Station House
Officer of S R Nagara Police Station. The Station House
Officer registered a case in Cr.No.24/2022 for the offence
punishable u/Sec.229(A) of IPC and submitted First
Information Report to this Court. After investigation, Sub-
Inspector of police, S.R Nagara police Station filed charge
sheet for the said offence punishable Sec. 229(A) of IPC
against the accused person. Hence, he has committed the
alleged offence.
4 CC No.16933/2022
3. The accused is in judicial custody. On receipt of
charge sheet, this court took the cognizance of the alleged
offence and furnished copy of the prosecution papers to the
accused. After hearing on charge, this Court has framed
accusation against accused for the offence punishable
U/Sec. 229(A) IPC for which accused pleaded not guilty and
claimed to be tried.
4. The prosecution in order to prove its case has
examined 2 witnesses as PW.1 and PW.2 and got marked
5 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5. Thereafter, the
statement of the accused u/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. has been
recorded. They have denied the incriminating
circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence
against him. He has not chosen to adduce his defence
evidence.
5 CC No.16933/2022
5. I have heard the arguments of both sides. Perused
the entire oral evidence and documents placed on record.
6. The points that arise for my consideration are as
under:
(1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable
doubt that the accused has violated bail conditions
imposed by 9th ACMM, in CC.1779/2022 and after
wards he became absconded to the Court and thereby
committed an offences punishable u/Sec. 229(A) of
IPC ?
(2) What order ?
7. My findings to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the affirmative,
Point No.2 : As per final order, for the following :
REASONS
8. Point No.1 :- It is well settled that in a criminal case
the entire burden of proof rests upon the prosecution and
the accused need to prove nothing. Suffice for the accused
6 CC No.16933/2022
to create doubt about the case of the prosecution and the
reliability of the witnesses for the prosecution.
9. The main allegation of the prosecution is that the
present accused is accused in Crime No.97/2020 for the
offence punishable u/sec.394 , 201 r/w 34 of IPC on the
file of S.R. Nagara P.S Bangalore. Hon'ble 9 th ACMM has
issued NBW against this accused in CC.4207/2021. The
accused has appeared before 9 th ACMM and got enlarged on
bail with some conditions. After that the present accused
has violates the bail conditions and not yet turned up
before 9th ACMM. Further it is the case of the prosecution is
that the Hon'ble 9th ACMM has enlarged accused in
CC.NO.1779/2022 . In this case also accused violates the
bail conditions and not yet appeared before 9 th ACMM. As
already stated supra, the prosecution has examined two
7 CC No.16933/2022
witnesses as PW.1 and 2 and 5 documents got marked as
Ex.P1 to 5.
10. The prosecution has been examined CW.1 as PW.1.
He being police officer, he specifically testified before this
court that the present accused got enlarged on bail in
CC.No.1779/2022 and CC.4207/2021. After enlarged on
bail, accused became absconded, he is not yet properly
appeared before the court. Despite issue process of NBW
proclamation and attachment against accused. The
accused has not yet appear before 9 th ACMM, Bangalore.
Therefore he lodged his report before Station House Officer
of S.R Nagara Police Station as per Ex.P1. Further he
identified the documents i.e., Ex.P2 to 4. He has been
subjected cross examination by the accused. It is elicited
in his cross examination he received warrant through one
Shivaraju. Further he admitted that he is not mentioned all
8 CC No.16933/2022
cases accused has been involved in Ex.P1 . Further he
admitted that he recorded in station house diary regarding
abscond of accused. Further he admitted that he could not
possible to produce station house diary before this court.
Further it is elicited in his cross examination he himself
and another one colleague went to native address of
accused i.e., Shivajinagara , Bangalore and trace accused
in the said address. Further he denied other material
suggestions made by accused counsel during the course of
cross examination.
11. Further the prosecution has been examined CW.2 as
PW.2, he being police officer and Investigating Officer of
this case. He specifically testified before this court that on
23.02.2022 when he was in Station House Officer duty at
about 2.45 p.m, complainant came and gave report. He
received, verified and registered criminal case against
9 CC No.16933/2022
accused in Crime No.24/2022. Further he testified before
this court that he prepared FIR and original copy of FIR
submitted before jurisdictional trial court and copy of the
FIR forwarded to his senior police officers. Further he
testified before this court that he obtained warrant, order
sheet, proclamation from 9th ACMM in CC.1779/2022. He
identified Ex.P1 to 5. He has been also subjected cross
examination by accused. In the cross examination he
admitted that there is a difference between complaint and
request and he denied other material suggestions made by
accused counsel during course of cross examination.
12. On perusal of oral and documentary evidence it
appears that Crime No.97/2020 registered against accused
No.1 by name Manjoor @ Rehaman Manjoor for the offence
punishable u/sec.394 r/w sec. 34 of IPC on the file of S.R
Nagara Police Station. The Station House Officer S R Nagar
10 CC No.16933/2022
Police Station took body warrant against this accused on
23.11.2020 from 9th ACMM, Bangalore. Further it can seen
from Exhibits it appears that on 24.11.2020 the present
accused has been produced before 9 th ACMM and took
police custody for a period of 4 days i.e., from 24.11.2020
till 27.11.2020. After that accused has been produced
before 9th ACMM Bangalore and accused remanded to JC
till 11.12.2020. Further it can seen from order sheet the
counsel for accused has filed bail application u/sec.437 of
Cr.P.C and application u/Sec.267 r/w 70(2) of Cr.P.C on
30.11.2020. The said applications allowed by 9 th ACMM
with conditions on 30.11.2020. The accused offered one
surety by name Shiva Kumar .S S/o Veerabaddrappa aged
about 34 years r/at No.41, 2nd cross, Nagarabhavi,
Moodlapalya, Shivanandanagar, Bangalore -9 and accused
released from judicial custody on 07.12.2020. Further it
can seen from order sheet after through investigation by
11 CC No.16933/2022
the Investigating Officer, Investigating Officer has charge
sheeted against accused No.1 to 5 for the offence
punishable u/sec.394, 201 r/w 34 of IPC and it is
numbered as CC.4207/2021. After charge sheet filed by
Investigation Officer against the accused No.1 to 5, accused
No.1 continuously absent before this Court in CC
NO.4201/2021. The Investigation Officer filed requisition
and sought body warrant against the accused No.1on
13/9/2021. In pursuance of body warrant accused No.1
regularly produced before this Court on 27/9/2021 till
11/11/2021. Further on 11/11/2021 body warrant
recalled and this Court issued intimation to jail authority to
release the accused No.1 from judicial custody. After that
accused No.1 regularly absent before this Court. Therefore,
this Court issued process of NBW and proclamation against
the accused No.1 and this Court called explanation of SHO
of S R Nagar police station for non-execution of process
12 CC No.16933/2022
issued by this Court against the accused No.1. After
received explanation from Investigation Officer and
jurisdictional SHO accused No.1 ordered to be split-up
from this case and accused No.1 personal bond and surety
bond stands forfeited vide order dated 12/1/2022. In view
of the order passed by this Court CC NO.1779/2022
registered against the accused No.1. Further it can seen
from order sheet as per order dated 12/1/2022 no criminal
mis-case is registered against the accused No.1 and his
surety. Further it can seen from order sheet in CC
NO.4207/2021 the accused No.1 appeared in CC
No.4207/2021 and filed application u/Sec.436 of Cr.P.C.
the said application is allowed and accused No.1 is directed
to pay sum of Rs.5,000/- instead of Rs.20,000/- of
personal bond amount. Further it can seen from order
sheet this order has not been complied by the accused
No.1. Further it can seen from order sheet that in CC
13 CC No.16933/2022
No.1679/2022 again accused No.1 produced before this
Court under due execution of NBW on 27/1/2022 and
counsel for accused filed bail application u/Sec.437 of
Cr.P.C. the said bail application allowed with 3 conditions
and he offered one surety as per the Court order and
accused No.1 got released from judicial custody on
27/1/2022. After that the accused No.1 again absent
before this Court. It is burden casted on the accused No.1
to prove that there is a any bonafide reasons he could not
possible to appeared before this Court in accordance with
the terms of the bail or bond. In the instant case, the
accused No.1 has not shown any believable reasons why he
was absent before this Court despite issued NBW and
proclamation by this Court and for what circumstances it
prevented him to appeared before this Court is not
forthcoming from the side of the accused. So the
prosecution proved guilt of accused beyond reasonable
14 CC No.16933/2022
doubt. Hence, accused is required to punish from this
hands of Court. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the
prosecution has proved charges levelled against the
accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, I answer
Point No.1 in the affirmative.
13. Point No.2: For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
Acting under Section 255(2) of Cr.P.C., accused is found guilty for the offence punishable U/Sec.229(A) of IPC.
Furnish free copy of this judgment to the accused forthwith.
Intimate the same to jail authorities. To hear on sentence.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected directly on computer and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 24 th day of January 2024).
(R.Mahesha) IX Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
15 CC No.16933/2022ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:
PW.1: Gangamuniyappa PW.2: Thopaiah
List of documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:
Ex.P.1 : Report Ex.P.2 : Warrant Ex.P3 : Order copy Ex.P4 : Order copy Ex.P5 : FIR
List of material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:
- NIL -
List of witnesses examined on behalf of the defence:
- NIL -
List of documents and materials marked on behalf of the defence:
- NIL -
IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bengaluru.16 CC No.16933/2022
Judgment pronounced through VC (Vide separate order) ORDER Acting under Section 255(2) of Cr.P.C., accused is found guilty for the offence punishable U/Sec.229(A) of IPC.
Furnish free copy of this judgment to the accused forthwith.
Intimate the same to jail authorities. To hear on sentence.
IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bengaluru.17 CC No.16933/2022
02.02.2024 ORDERS REGARDING SENTENCE The learned counsel for accused person submitted that he is innocent and he is the bread earner of his family, due to his mistake, though he committed the offence. It is not punishable with death or life imprisonment and he has been in judicial custody from 02.03.2023 till today, and he realized his mistake, and hence less punishment may be imposed and he may be released by giving benefit of set off. Hence, leniency may be taken into account, and to be sentenced less imprisonment.
The learned Sr.APP argued that, the prosecution has clearly proved the guilt of the accused, and if the maximum punishment has not been imposed, and accused will also commit the same offence, after releasing from the custody and the sentence imposed might be a lesson for 18 CC No.16933/2022 accused, and hence the maximum sentence may be awarded.
The accused age is 34 years as on the offence, since from his arrest and till today his family members have not appeared before the Court or the learned counsel for accused has also not appeared. Hence, it is very clear that he is a poor person, if he is imposed the maximum punishment definitely he will serve the same. But if he imposed the less imprisonment by giving set of imprisonment which he has under gone during trial, definitely he will made him to realize mistakes and reform himself. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The Convict is sentenced to under go SI for a period of 1 years and a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default the convict shall under go one month simple imprisonment.19 CC No.16933/2022
The convict has been in judicial custody nearly 1 year and the same is to be set off and accordingly set off.
The convict has been in judicial custody for nearly 1 year and the same is to be set off and accordingly set off.
The convict shall pay the fine today itself, on his failure he has to under go simple imprisonment for one month.
Since 02.03.2023 accused is in judicial custody. The said period is ordered to be given set off for the period of imprisonment as per Sec.428 of Cr.P.C.
CMO is hereby directed to verify records and issue conviction warrant against accused through jurisdiciton SHO and Investigation Officer. Intimate the same to the jail authorities same shall be transmit to Jail authority for further needful.
Furnish free copy of this Judgment to the accused forthwith.
IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bengaluru.20 CC No.16933/2022 21 CC No.16933/2022 22 CC No.16933/2022