Bangalore District Court
The State By Subramanyanagara Ps vs A1. Sathish Gowda on 3 August, 2021
IN THE COURT OF XXXIX ADDL.ACMM,
BENGALURU
Present : Sandesh Prabhu.B. BA.L., LL.B.
XXXIX ACMM, Bengaluru,
C.C.No.18870/2019
Dated : On this the 3rd August, 2021
Complainant: The State by Subramanyanagara PS
Police Station, Bengaluru
(By Assistant Public Prosecutor).
V/s
Accused: A1. Sathish Gowda,
S/o Venkatesh.B.M,
R/at no.2708/B,
12th main, D block,
2nd phase, Rajajinagara,
Bangalore
A2. Raviraj Nayak,
S/o Nagaraj,
R/at 1848, 6th A main,
D block, Rajajinagar,
Bangalore
(By Sri.Sunil Kumar & Ravi
Chandra.D.M Advocates)
Date of Report of Offence : 10042019
Name of the Complainant : Shri. Parashuram
Natikar
Date of Commencement of
recording of Evidence : 31072021
12 CC18870/2019
Date of Closing of evidence : 31072021
Offences complained are :U/Sec 435 of IPC &
u/s 2(A) prevention
of destruction and
loss of property
Act1981
Opinion of the Judge : Accused found not
guilty
(Sandesh Prabhu B.)
XXXIX ACMM,
Bengaluru
:: JUDGEMENT ::
The PSI of Subramanyanagara PS, Bengaluru has
filed charge sheet against the accused no.1 & 2 for the
offences punishable u/s 435 of IPC and u/s 2(A)
Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property
Act1981.
2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is as
follows :
The complainant is the hotel owner of Lakshmi
Chats and Snacks situated at no.2914/A, 2 nd cross,
13rd main, D block, 2nd phase, Rajajinagar. That on
12 CC18870/2019
10042019, he parked his Hero Honda CD Delux
vehicle bearing Reg.no.KA28Y2339 nearby his hotel
and slept inside his house. At about 2.00 AM, accused
no.1 & 2 had came by drinking alcohol near to the said
bike, plucked the petrol pipe of the tank of above said
bike, collected the petrol and poured the petrol on the
bike and set fire on it and thereby destroyed the
complainant's bike and caused loss of Rs.20,000/ to
the complainant. Therefore the complainant gave
complaint against the accused no.1 and 2.
3. On the basis of complaint given by complainant
the Subramanyanagara police have registered a case
against the accused no.1 & 2 in Cr.No.67/2019 for the
offences punishable u/s 435 of IPC and u/s 2(A)
Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property
Act1981. After completion of the investigation, the
Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet against
the accused no.1 & 2 for the offences punishable u/s
12 CC18870/2019
435 of IPC and u/s 2(A) Prevention of Destruction and
Loss of Property Act1981.
4. After filing the charge sheet, cognizance was
taken for the offences punishable u/s 435 of IPC and
u/s 2(A) Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property
Act1981 against accused no.1 & 2 and summons were
issued to the said accused persons. In pursuance of the
summons, the accused no.1 & 2 were appeared before
the court. Thereafter the prosecution papers have been
furnished to the accused no.1 & 2 as contemplated
U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter heard the learned
prosecution and counsel for accused no.1 & 2 about
framing of charge. Since there were sufficient materials
to frame charge against the accused no.1 & 2 charges
were framed u/s 435 of IPC and u/s 2(A) Prevention of
Destruction and Loss of Property Act1981. The sum
and substance of the accusation was read over to the
accused no.1 & 2 and their answer to the said
accusation was denial and they claimed to be tried.
12 CC18870/2019
Hence, the prosecution was given an opportunity to
establish the guilt of the accused no.1 & 2.
5. The prosecution in order to bring home the
guilt of the accused persons, it got examined only one
witness as PW1 and got marked two documents as per
Ex.P1 & Ex.P2. Since PW1 being the complainant has
turned hostile to the prosecution case, the prayer of the
learned APP for examining the other witnesses has been
rejected and remaining witnesses have been dropped as
no purpose would be served. Since there is no any
incriminating evidence against the accused persons, the
statement of the accused persons as required U/Sec.
313 of Cr.P.C. is dispensed with.
6. Heard the arguments of learned prosecution
and counsel for accused persons.
7. The points that arise for consideration of this
Court are as under :
12 CC18870/2019
:: POINTS ::
1.Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on 10042019 when CW1 parked his Hero Honda CD Delux bike bearing number KA28Y2339 nearby his hotel Lakshmi Chats and Snacks situated at no.2914/A, 2nd cross, 13th main, 2nd phase, D block, Rajajinagar, at about 200 AM accused persons had came to the above said place by drinking alcohol, plucked the petrol pipe of petrol tank of above said bike, poured the petrol on the bike and set the fire on the bike and thereby caused mischief by setting the fire on the bike and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 435 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution further proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on the above said place, time and during the same transaction, accused persons had destroyed the bike and caused a loss of Rs.20,000/ to the CW1 by setting fire on the above said bike and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 2(A) Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act1981?
12 CC18870/2019
3. What Order?
8. The findings of this Court on above points are as under: Point No.1 : In Negative Point No.2 : In Negative Point No.3 : As per the final order for the following: REASONS
9. POINT No.1 & 2 : Both these points are connected each other and in order to avoid the repetition of the facts and appreciation of the evidence, all these points are taken up together for common consideration.
10. It is the specific case of the prosecution that the complainant is the hotel owner of Lakshmi Chats and Snacks situated at no.2914/A, 2 nd cross, 13rd main, D block, 2nd phase, Rajajinagar. That on 10042019, he parked his vehicle bearing reg.no. KA28Y2339 near to his hotel front road and slept 12 CC18870/2019 inside his house. At about 2.00 AM, accused had came by drinking alcohol, near to the said bike, plucked the petrol pipe of the tank of above said bike, collected the petrol and poured the petrol on the bike and set fire on it and thereby destroyed the complainant's bike and caused loss of Rs.20,000/ to the complainant. Thereafter the complainant gave complaint against the accused no.1 & 2.
11. The prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of the accused persons, it got examined only one witness as PW1. Along with the oral evidence, the prosecution has produced and got marked two documents as per Ex.P1 & 2.
12. The prosecution got examined PW1, who is the complainant in this case. PW1 has deposed in his evidence that about 2 years back when he parked his vehicle in front of his hotel at that time the bike got damaged. With regards to this he gave complaint in the 12 CC18870/2019 police station and police had obtained his signature on two documents but he is not aware of contents of those documents. At this stage, the learned APP treated this witness as hostile witness and cross examined him with great efforts. But, in spite of that, PW1 has denied all the suggestions put by prosecution and nothing has been elucidated from his mouth so as to support the case of prosecution.
13. It is to be expected that, PW.1 being the informant/victim being the star and material witness, has to depose as per the version of prosecution. But in this case, he has turned hostile to the prosecution and not supported his own case and denied the acts of the accused persons. Moreover, on perusal of the oral evidence of PW1, it reveals that he has compromised the matter along with the accused persons. In view of the nonsupporting of the main and material witnesses, this Court is of the considered view that, prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of the accused 12 CC18870/2019 persons for the alleged offences beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, for the said reasons this Court answers point Nos.1 & 2 in the Negative.
14. POINT No.3: In view of discussion held on above points, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
:: ORDER :: Acting u/s 248 (1) of Cr.P.C., the accused no.1 & 2 are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable u/s 435 of IPC and u/s 2A Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act1981.
The bail bonds of the accused no.1 & 2 and their sureties shall stand cancelled.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, revised and corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 03rd day of August, 2021) (Sandesh Prabhu B.) XXXIX ACMM, Bengaluru ANNEXURE
1. Witnesses examined on behalf of Prosecution PW1 : Parashuram Natikar, S/o Mahadev
2. Documents exhibited on behalf of Prosecution 12 CC18870/2019 Ex.P.1 : Complaint Ex.P1a : Signature of PW1 Ex.P2 : Spot Mahazar Ex.P2a : Signature of PW1
3. Material objects exhibited on behalf of prosecution NIL
4. List of witnesses and documents on Defense side Nil (Sandesh Prabhu B.) XXXIX ACMM, Bengaluru