Bangalore District Court
Unknown vs M. Shiva on 7 November, 2019
IN THE COURT OF THE LIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS SPECIAL JUDGE,
BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019
-: PRESENT :-
S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI, B.A. LL.B.,
LIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Special Judge,
Bengaluru.
SPECIAL C.C.No. 84/2016
COMPLAINANT :
The State of Karnataka
By Ramamurthy Nagara Police
Station, Bengaluru.
[Rep. by Public Prosecutor]
/ VERSUS /
ACCUSED:
1. M. Shiva,
S/o. Late Meghanathan,
Aged about 20 years,
R/at. Surya Bekary road,
Muneshwara Nagara,
Ramamurthy Nagara,
Bengaluru.
2
Spl.C C.84/2016
2. Smt. Chitra,
W/o. Late Meghanathan,
Aged about 20 years,
R/at. Surya Bekary road,
Muneshwara Nagara,
Ramamurthy Nagara,
Bengaluru.
[Rep. by Mr. MCP - Advocate]
TABULATION OF EVENTS
1. Date of Commission : 26/10/2015
Of Offence
2. Date of Report :
Of Offence 26/10/2015
3. Date of arrest of
Accused No.1 : 13/11/2015
Accused No. 2
4. Date of release on Bail
Accused No.1 : 23/3/2016
Accused No. 2 4/12/2015
5 Period undergone in
Judicial Custody by
Accused No.1 : 4 months 10 days
Accused No. 2 21 days
6 Name of the complainant : Smt. Manjula
7. Date of Commencement :
of recording evidence 23/11/2017
3
Spl.C C.84/2016
8. Date of Closing of :
20/09/2019
Evidence
9. Charges framed : Sections 366, 376, 107 IPC
and Sections 5(l) R/w 6 and 17
of POCSO Act, 2012.
10. Opinion of the Judge : As per final Order
(S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI)
LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge,
Bangalore.
4
Spl.C C.84/2016
JUDGMENT
This Charge Sheet is filed by the Police Inspector of Ramamurthy nagar Police Station, Bengaluru City against the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of POCSO Act, 2012.
2. The brief facts of the case of the Prosecution are that the Accused No.1 with an intention to to have Sexual intercourse with the minor Victim made friendship with her and kidnapped on 26/11/2015, took her to the house of Cw-23 Lakshman and forcibly committed Rape on he, in spite of her resistance and against her Will. He has further taken her to Salem to the houses of his relatives and on 12/11/2015 left her in the house. The Accused No.2 has abated the Accused No.1 to kidnap and commit rape on the Victim. 5
Spl.C C.84/2016
3. The Complainant mother of the Victim gave the complaint on 26/10/2015 suspecting the Accused has kidnapped her daughter from her house as on two prior occasions he had kidnapped her and taken to different places. Therefore the case has been registered against the Accused in Crime No. 620/2015 for the offence punishable under Sections 363 IPC.
4. The Accused No.1 and 2 arrested on 16/11/2015 and produced before the court and thereafter remanded to judicial custody. Afterwards, they represented through the counsel. The Accused No.1 granted bail by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in Crl.. Petn. No. 1952/2016 dt: 23/3/2016 and this Court has granted bail to Accused No.2 on 4/12/2015.
5. The I.O. has conducted investigation and filed charge sheet against the Accused for the offences 6 Spl.C C.84/2016 punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of POCSO Act, 2012. This Court has taken cognizance of the said offences and heard, arguments of both learned Public prosecutor for the State and the learned Counsel for the Accused No.1 and
2. The prima-facie materials produced against the Accused No.1 and 2, therefore, charges framed under Sections 366, 376, 107 of IPC and Section 5(l) R/w 6, 17 of POCSO Act, 2012. The Charges are read over and explained to the Accused No.1 and 2, they are not pleaded guilty and claims to be tried.
6. The prosecution has examined 4 witnesses out of 20 witnesses as PWs 1 to 4 . The documents are marked as Ex.P-1 to 9, 2(a), 3(a), 5(a). The CW's 13, 18 to 20 are remained absent in spite of issuance of Bailable Warrant. The Victim and others turned hostile, therefore the prayer of learned Public Prosecutor to reissue the same has been rejected, as no purpose will 7 Spl.C C.84/2016 be served even if they are examined before the Court and closed the evidence of prosecution.
7. In the evidence of prosecution witnesses no incriminating circumstances deposed against Accused No.1 and 2. Therefore the Statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. is dispensed with.
8. Heard, the arguments of learned Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned Counsel for the Accused on merits.
9. The points for my consideration are :
1. Whether the Prosecution proves that the Accused with an intention to marry the Victim and have Sexual intercourse with her on 26/11/2015, kidnapped her, taken to the house of CW-3 Lakshman and committed Rape and Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault repeatedly on her punishable under Sections 366, 376 IPC and Sections 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012?8
Spl.C C.84/2016
2. Whether the Prosecution proves that the Accused No.2 has Abated Accused No.1 to kidnap, commit Rape and Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault on the Victim and committed the offence punishable under Sections 107 IPC and 17 of POCSO Act, 2012? 3 What Order?
9. My findings on the above points are as under:-
Point No.1 : In the Negative
Point No.2 : In the Negative
Point No.3 : As per final order
for the following
REASONS
10. Point No.1 & 2 : The allegations made against the Accused No.1 in respect of Kidnap, Rape and Penetrative Sexual Assault repeatedly on Victim and Accused No.2 Abated him to do the said illegal acts. In proof of the said allegations the prosecution has produced the evidence through the Victim, her mother, sister and one of the independent witness. All the 9 Spl.C C.84/2016 witnesses are turned hostile and deposed contrary to the documents produced before the Court.
11. The witness Balaji is examined as PW-1. He has shown ignorance about the Victim and the Complainant, but he is aware of Accused No.1 and 2. He has treated hostile and cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor. In the cross-examined he has shown ignorance about the love affair between the Accused No.1 and the Victim, in connection with quarrel raised by mother of the victim near the house of the Accused and also Rape committed by the Accused No.1 on the Victim.
12. The Complainant Manjula is examined as PW-2. She is the mother of the Victim and identified the Accused No.1 as her Son-in-law and Accused No.2 is his mother. She has admitted the complaint given to the police after missing of the Victim from the house and it is marked as Ex. P-2 and her signature as Ex.P-2(a). She 10 Spl.C C.84/2016 has further identified her signature in the Mahazar Ex.P-3 and her signature is marked as Ex.P-3(a). She is not supported the contents of both Ex.P-2 and P-3 and shown ignorance about the love affair between the Victim and the Accused No.1. Therefore, she is treated hostile and in the cross-examined the statement given before the police stating that Accused No.1 after kidnapping her minor daughter, the Victim committed Rape on her and he was Abated by his mother Accused No.2, which isi marked as Ex.P-4.
13. The Victim is examined as PW-3. She has identified the Accused No.1 as her husband and Accused No.2 her Mother-in-law. The Statement given by her under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is marked as Ex.P-5 and her signature as Ex.P-5(a). She has denied her Statement given before the Police as per Ex.P-6 stating that the Accused No.1 on the promise to marry, kidnapped and committed Rape on her with the instigation and Abatement of Accused No.2.
11
Spl.C C.84/2016
14. The elder brother of the Victim Lakshman is examined as PW-4. He is also admitted that Victim is the daughter of his sister and Accused No.1 is the husband of Victim and Accused No.2 is her mother in law. He has denied the Statement given to the police as per Ex.P-7 stating that the Accused No.1 on the promise to marry the Victim, kidnapped and committed Rape on her with the instigation and Abatement of Accused No.2.
15. The prosecution has not produced supporting evidence in proof of the Kidnap, Rape and Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault committed by the Accused No.1 on the minor Victim on 26/11/2015 and afterwards took her to her relatives house and repeated the same with the Abatement of Accused NO.2. The important aspect is the Victim, Complainant and independent witnesses turned hostile and their evidence is contrary to the contents of Statements given before the Police. Therefore, in absence of the corroboration in their evidence in proof of the allegations made against both 12 Spl.C C.84/2016 the Accused Nos.1 and 2, I come to conclusion that prosecution has failed to prove that the Accused No.1 with an intention to marry the Victim kidnapped her, taken to his relatives house and committed Rape and Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault punishable under Sections 366, 376 IPC and Section 5(l) r/w 6 of POCSO Act, 2012. Further no proof placed that Accused No.2 has Abated the Accused No.1 to commit the said offences to attract the offence under Section 107 IPC and Section 17 of POCSO Act, 2012. Hence, I answer Points No.1 and 2 in Negative.
16. Point No.3: In view of my above discussion, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. Accused No.1 M. Shiva S/o Meghanathan, and Accused No.2, Chitra W/o Meghanathan, are hereby acquitted for offences punishable under Sections 366, 376, 107 of IPC and Sections 5(l) R/w 6 and 17 of POCSO Act, 2012.13
Spl.C C.84/2016 The bail bonds executed by the Accused No.1 and 2 and surety under Section 437 (A) Cr.P.C. shall be in force till the completion of appeal period.
(Dictated to the Judgement writer, transcript and computerized by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court today on 7th day of November, 2019.) (S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE
1) List of witnesses examined for the Prosecution PW.1 Balaji PW.2 Manjula PW.3 Gowri @ Gowramma PW.4 Lakshman 14 Spl.C C.84/2016
2) List of documents marked for the Prosecution Ex.P1 Statement Ex.P2 Complaint Ex.P3 Mahazar Ex.P3(a) Signature of Pw-2 Ex.P4 Statement Ex.P5 Statement of Victim U/Section 164 Cr.P.C.
Ex.P6 Statement of Victim
Ex.P7 Statement of PW-4
Ex.P8 Study Certificate
Ex.P9 Medical Certificate of Accused
3) List of Material Objects marked for the Prosecution
Nil
4) List of witnesses examined for the Accused Nos 1 and 2
Nil
5) List of documents marked for the Accused Nos 1 and 2
Nil
15
Spl.C C.84/2016
6) List of Material Objects marked for the Accused Nos 1 and 2 Nil (S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.
*** 16 Spl.C C.84/2016 Judgment pronounced in the open court, (vide separate Judgment ) ORDER Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. Accused No.1 M. Shiva S/o Meghanathan, and Accused No.2, Chitra W/o Meghanathan, are hereby acquitted for offences punishable under Sections 366, 376, 107 of IPC and Sections 5(l) R/w 6 and 17 of POCSO Act, 2012.
17
Spl.C C.84/2016 The bail bonds executed by the Accused No.1 and 2 and surety under Section 437 (A) Cr.P.C. shall be in force till the completion of appeal period.
(S.H.PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.