Bangalore District Court
State By Yelahanka Upanagara vs 4.Manik Velu on 3 January, 2022
IN THE COURT OF THE 30TH ADDL.CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 3rd day of January, 2022.
:Present: Sri. I.P.Naik, B.A., LL.B.(Spl),
30th ACMM, Bengaluru
Judgment U/s.355 of Cr.P.C.
C.C.No. 27173/2021
Date of Offence 10.03.2017
Complainant State by Yelahanka Upanagara, Police
Station
V/s.
Accused 4.Manik Velu,
R/at.No.95/2, RR Layout,
Vijinapura,
K.R.Pura Road,
Bengaluru-16
5. Prakash,
R/at.No.95/2, R R Layout,
Vijinapura, K.R Pura Road,
Bengaluru-16.
Offences U/s. 4 of DP Act and Sec.504, 506 of
IPC.
Plea Recorded on:9.04.2021 and accused
persons Pleaded not guilty.
313 Statement recorded on: Dispensed with
Final Oder Accused No.4 & 5 are acquitted
Date of Order 03-01-2022
*****
2 C.C.No.27173/2021
JUDGMENT
The PSI of Yelahanka New Town, Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused persons for the offences punishable U/s. 4 of DP Act and Sec.504, 506 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
It is alleged that, 10.03.2017, accused No.2 along with other accused came to the house of CW1 situated at house No.261, 4 th Main Road, Attur Layout, Yelahanka Upanagara Police Station, and conducted marriage talks, stating that, they are not in need of any dowry and wanted to get engaged his son accused No.2 with CW4 and they will conduct marriage in their expenses.
Hence, on 22.6.2017 CW1 performed marriage engagement of CW1 and accused No.2 at Shri party Hall, Attur Layout, in their expenses. Further, after fixing the marriage date on 07.02.2018, accused demanded for dowry of Rs.5/- Lakhs and 250gms of gold or else to cancel the engagement and in furtherance of your common intention, abused CW1, in filthy language, so as to cause breach of peace and insult her and caused criminal intimidation, by posing life threat with dire consequences and thereby committed the aforesaid offences. In this regard, CW1 lodged complaint before the jurisdictional police.
During the course of investigation, I.O. visited the place of incident, drawn spot mahazar in the presence of the witnesses, recorded the statement of 3 C.C.No.27173/2021 witnesses and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against accused person for the aforesaid offences.
3. On the basis of charge sheet and other materials cognizance taken and case is registered against accused persons.
4. The copies of the prosecution papers have been furnished to the accused persons as required under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C.
5. The charge is framed, contents of charge have been read over and explained to the accused persons in the language known to them, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, hence, the prosecution is called upon to prove its case.
6. In order to prove the guilt of the accused persons, prosecution has examined 1 witnesses as PW1and got marked 2 documents as Ex.P.1.& P.2. Even though cross-examining the PW1 by the prosecution, by treating hostile witnesses, nothing worth is brought from the mouth of PW1 to prove the guilt of the accused. In case, if the remaining witnesses are examined, no purpose will be served. Hence, prayer of the learned Sr.APP is rejected and other 4 C.C.No.27173/2021 remaining witnesses are dropped. Further, recording of statement of accused U/s.313 of Cr.P.C is dispensed with.
7. Heard both the side and perused the material evidence on record.
8. The following points would arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, in furtherance of the common intention, 10.03.2017, accused No.2 along with other accused came to the house of CW1 situated at house No.261, 4 th Main Road, Attur Layout, Yelahanka Upanagara Police Station, and conducted marriage talks, stating that, they are not in need of any dowry and wanted to get engaged his son accused No.2 with CW4 and they will conduct marriage in their expenses. Hence, on 22.6.2017 CW1 performed marriage engagement of CW1 and accused No.2 at Shri party Hall, Attur Layout, in their expenses. Further, after fixing the marriage date on 07.02.2018, accused demanded for dowry of Rs.5/- Lakhs and 250gms of gold or else to cancel the engagement and thereby committed an offence punishable U/s. 4 of DP Act., within my cognizance. ?5 C.C.No.27173/2021
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the above said date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, in furtherance of your common intention, accused persons have abused CW1, in filthy language, so as to cause breach of peace and thereby committed an offence punishable U/s.504 of IPC.,?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the above said date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, in furtherance of your common intention, accused persons insult her and caused criminal intimidation, by posing life threat with dire consequences and thereby committed an offence punishable U/s.506 of IPC.,?
4. What order.?
9. My findings on the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.2 : IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.3 : IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.4 : As per final order
......................... for the following.., 6 C.C.No.27173/2021 REASONS
10. Point No.1 to 3 :-According to prosecution case, PW1 being the main and direct witnesses to the alleged incident, has not supported the prosecution case. Even though the learned Sr.APP has cross-examined them by treating hostile, no material is brought from the mouth of PW1.
11. After recording ocular evidence of PW1, the learned Sr.APP prays for issuance of summons to other remaining witnesses. In this case, the main witnesses have not supported the prosecution, hence, re-issuing summons, NBW and proclamation to the other remaining witnesses will not serve any purpose. Therefore, prayer of the learned Sr.APP is rejected and statement of the accused U/s.313 of Cr.P.C is dispensed with. By considering ocular evidence of PW1 this court held that, prosecution has utterly failed to prove the guilt of the accused persons. Accordingly, Point No.1 to 3 is answered in the Negative.
12. Point No.4: In view of the Negative findings on the above point No.1 to 3, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER The Powers confirmed upon me U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused No.4 & 5 are acquitted of the alleged offences punishable U/s. 4 of DP Act and Sec.504, 506 of IPC.7 C.C.No.27173/2021
The bail bond of accused person and surety extended for further 6 months in order to comply Sec.437 (a) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, this bail bond automatically stands cancelled.
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, hence, granting of compensation of U/s.357 of Cr.P.C. is declined.
(Dictated to the Stenographer through computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 3rd day of January, 2022).
(I.P Naik.) 30 A.C.M.M., B'lore.
th ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
P.W. 1 : Smt. Dharani
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 : Complaint
Ex.P.2 : Mahazar
3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE NIL
4. LIST OF THE METERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION NIL (I.P.Naik) 30th Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
8 C.C.No.27173/2021Judgment pronounced in Open Court vide separate:-
ORDER The Powers confirmed upon me U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused No.4 & 5 are acquitted of the alleged offences punishable U/s. 4 of DP Act and Sec.504, 506 of IPC.
The bail bond of accused person and surety extended for further 6 months in order to comply Sec.437 (a) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, this bail bond automatically stands cancelled.
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, hence, granting of compensation of U/s.357 of Cr.P.C. is declined.
(I.P.Naik) 30th Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
9 C.C.No.27173/2021