Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

Kengeri Police Station vs No.2-C.Chamraj And on 2 March, 2020

    IN THE COURT OF LVI ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
              MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE

            PRESENT: SRI.HATTIKAL PRABHU.S.
                                 M.A.,LL.B(Spl) LL.M.,

       DATED THIS THE 02nd DAY OF MARCH 2020

                     JUDGMENT

U/Sec. 355 of the Cr.P.C Serial Number of the C.C.212/2016 case Name of the State by Police Sub Inspector, complainant Kengeri Police station (Reptd. by Sr.Asst.Public Prosecutor ) Name of the accused 3).Prasanna Kumar, person/s R/At. 1009, Pooja Apartment, 1st cross, K.Krishnaiah Layout, BSK 3rd stage, Kathriguppe, Bangalore.

(Note case against accused no.1-Smt.Savithramma, accused no.2-C.Chamraj and and accused no.4-Narendra Babu is split up and registered in C.C.30284/2019) (Reptd by Sri.B.Srinivas.. Adv.,) Offences complained U/Secs. 447, 427, 506 r/w Sec.

of                    34 of IPC


Charges framed      for U/Sec.447, 427, 506 r/w Sec.
the offences            34 of IPC
                                2              C.C.212/2016




Date                      of 12.11.2014
commencement              of
offence
Date                      of 27.01.2020
commencement              of
recording evidence

Date of closure of 17.02.2020 recording evidence Plea of the accused Not Guilty and his examination :

Offences proved               Nil

Final Order :                 Accused Not found guilty

Date of final order           02.03.2020


I. Brief statement of reasons for the decision:

1. In support of the case of prosecution, C.W.1-

informant of crime - Sri.Subramanyam Naidu is examined as P.W.2. This witness deposed that he knows the accused person and he deposed that the accused have not trespassed into his property and did not cut electricity connection and did not put life threat to him and C.W.2.

He further deposed that he did not lodge complaint before police and police did not draw mahazar in this 3 C.C.212/2016 presence and he does not know the contents of Ex.P.1- Mahazar and Ex.P.3-Complaint.

This witness was treated as hostile witness by the Learned Sr.Asst.Public Prosecutor and cross examined at length. In the cross examination also nothing worth could be elicited from his mouth to support the case of the prosecution.

2. C.W.2- Sri.Niranjan Kumar C.S is examined as P.W.1. This witness deposed that he knows the accused persons and he has not trespassed into the property of C.W.1 and did not disconnect the electricity connection and did not put life threat to him and C.W.1.

Further P.W.1 deposed that he has not given statement before police and police did not draw mahazar in his presence as per Ex.P.1 .

This witness was treated as hostile witness by the Learned Sr.Asst.Public Prosecutor and cross examined at length. In the cross examination also nothing worth could be elicited from his mouth to support the case of the prosecution.

4 C.C.212/2016

3. P.W.1 and P.W.2 being the prime witnesses turned fully hostile and did not support the case of the prosecution. Hence, examination of other witnesses was dropped, by rejecting prayer of Learned Sr.A.PP. for issue of process. With a view that no purpose would be served by examining other witnesses.

4. Under these circumstances, the charges leveled against accused remains unproved. As such the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused with cogent, convincing and corroborative evidence. For the reasons discussed above, this court comes to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused.

II. FINAL ORDER Acting U/Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C., I hereby acquit the accused no.3 for the offences punishable U/sec. 447, 427 and 506 r/w Sec. 34 of IPC.

Accused no.3 is set at liberty forthwith and the bail bond of accused and that of surety stand canceled. 5 C.C.212/2016 Keep the entire records in split up C.C.No.30284/2019 pending against accused no.1, 2 and 4.

(Judgment typed to my online dictation by the stenographer, transcript thereof, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 2 nd day of March 2020).

(Hattikal Prabhu .S) XXXII Addl.C.M.M. Bangalore.

:ANNEXURE:

1.List of Witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:
P.W.1-Sri.Niranjan Kumar.C.S P.W.2-Sri.C.Subramanyam Naidu
2. List of Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:-
Ex.P.1: Mahazar Ex.P.1(a) : Signature Ex.P.2: Statement of P.W.1 Ex.P.3: Complaint Ex.P.3(a): Signature
3.:- List of witnesses and documents marked on behalf of the accused NIL
4. List of Material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:
NIL (Hattikal Prabhu.S) XXXII Addl.C.M.M. Bangalore.