Bangalore District Court
State By Yeshwanthapura P.S vs Sangam.H.A on 11 January, 2023
1
SC No.717/2017
KABC010134122017
IN THE COURT OF THE LXI ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BANGALORE CITY
Dated this the 11 th day of January 2023
PRESENT
SRI.R.RAVI, B.Sc., LL.B.,
LXI Addl. C.C. & S.J., Bangalore.
S.C.No.717/2017
COMPLAINANT: State by Yeshwanthapura P.S.,
(By Learned Public Prosecutor)
V/s.
ACCUSED : 1. Sangam.H.A
S/o.Late Annegowda
Aged about 30 years
R/a.No.4
Sanjeevininagar
Mudalpalya Tent Road
Bangalore.
(Accused No.1)
(By Sri.R.S., Advocate)
2
SC No.717/2017
2. Byregowda
S/o.Krishnappa
Aged about 36 years
R/a.C/o.Manjanna's House
Basaveshwaranagara
Arishinakunte
Bangalore.
(Accused No.2)
(By Sri.R.S, Advocate)
3. Somashekar @ Giri @ Raghu
S/o.Chennegowda
Aged about 31 years
R/a.Muniyappa Building
Rajarajeshwarinagara
Javaregowda Doddi
Bangalore.
(Accused No.4)
(By Sri.H.T., Advocate)
4 Shekar Babu @ Shekar @
Babu
S/o.Late Puttappa
Aged about 40 years
No.49, Holi Cross House
N.G.Layout
Indiranagara
Nagasandra Post
Bangalore.
(Accused No.7)
(By Sri.M.D.L., Advocate)
3
SC No.717/2017
1. Date of 23.08.2014
Commission :
of Offence
2. Date of Report :
of Offence 23.08.2014
3. Status of the : Accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7
accused are on bail
4. Name of the : Sri Anjan Kumar.V, PSI
complainant
5. Date of : 15.02.2019
Commencement
of evidence
6. Date of Closing of : 03.10.2022
Evidence
7. Offences : Offences punishable
complained of under Sections 148,
399, 402 & 120B R/w.
Section 149 of IPC.
8. Opinion of the : Accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7
Judge are acquitted for the
offences punishable
under section 148, 399,
402 & 120B R/w. Section
149 of IPC.
J UD GM E N T
This is a charge sheet one filed by the Yeshwanthapura
4
SC No.717/2017
Police Station against the accused for the offences punishable
under Sections under Sections 148, 399, 402 & 120B R/w.
Section 149 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that;
On 23.08.2014 at about 8.00 p.m., near Yeshwanthapura
railway station open space within the jurisdiction of
complainant police station the accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7
conspired along with split up Accused No.3, 5 & 6 & had
formed in to an unlawful assembly with the common object
of committing dacoity of cash of Rs.30 Crores from house
No.49, 1st Floor Holy Cross Nilaya, M.G.Layout of CW-6/Joseph
and CW-7/Smt.Rita by holding deadly weapons like Long,
Knife, Iron Road, Wooden club & chilli Power Packet and thereby
committed the offences punishable u/Sec.120B, 148, 399 & 402
R/w. Section 149 of IPC.
3. On receipt of the charge sheet, the learned XXIV ACMM,
Bengaluru took cognizance of the offences cited above and since
the alleged offences are exclusively triable by the Court of
5
SC No.717/2017
Sessions, then the above case was committed to this Court and
after receipt of the records, the accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7 were
secured & after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor and so also
the defence counsel under Section 227 of Cr.P.C., the charges for
the offences under Section u/Sec.120B, 148, 399 & 402 R/w.
Section 149 of IPC are framed against the above accused No.1, 2,
4 & 7 and since the above accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7 did not plead
guilty and claims to be tried then the matter is posted for trial.
4. In order to prove the guilt of the above accused persons,
the prosecution has got examined five witnesses i.e., CW-06, CW-
07, CW-03, CW-01 & CW-13 as PW-1 to PW-5 and got marked
documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7 and further got marked six
material objects at MO-1 to 6 and after closer of the prosecution
side evidence, the statement of the accused under Section 313 of
Cr.P.C. is recorded and since the accused denied the
incriminating evidence appearing against them and did not
choose to lead any defence evidence then the matter was posted
for arguments.
6
SC No.717/2017
5. And I have heard the arguments of both sides and
perused the entire materials placed on record and the points that
would arise for my consideration are as below;
1. Whether the prosecution proves
beyond reasonable doubt that on
23.08.2014 at about 8.00 p.m., near
Yeshwanthapura railway station
open space within the jurisdiction of
complainant police station the
accused No. 1, 2 4 & 7 conspired
along with split up Accused No.3,
5 & 6 & had formed in to an
unlawful assembly with the
common object of committing
dacoity of cash of Rs.30 Crores from
house No.49, 1st Floor Holy Cross
Nilaya, M.G. Layout of CW-
6/Joseph and CW-7/Smt.Rita by
holding deadly weapons like Long,
Knife, Iron Road, Wooden club &
chilli Power Packet and thereby
committed the offences punishable
u/Sec. 120B, 148, 399 & 402 R/w.
Section 149 of IPC?
2. What order?
6. My answer to the above points are as follows;
Point No.1 : In the Negative
Point No.2 : As per final order, for the following:-
7
SC No.717/2017
R E A SON S
7. POINT NO.1:- In order to prove the facts of the above
point though the prosecution has got examined five witnesses
i.e., CW-06, CW-07, CW-03, CW-01 & CW-13 as PW-1 to PW-5
and also got marked documents at Ex.P.1 to 7 and further got
marked six material objects at MO-1 to 6, the same are of no
help to the case of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the
accused beyond all reasonable doubt as there are lot of
variations and contradictions in the said oral and documentary
evidence of the prosecution that are placed on record. Now let
me examine it.
8. First of all though the prosecution has got examined
material eye witness of CW-6, his version is of no help to the
case of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond
all reasonable doubt as in his evidence he has simply deposed
that on 23.08.2014 at about 11.00 to 11.20 p.m., around ten
police men along with accused No.7 had come to search for an
amount of Rs.30 Crores in his house and on search nothing
8
SC No.717/2017
was found and on that day the said accused No.7 was not at all
available in his house.
9. And since the above witness i.e., CW-6/PW-1 has not at
all supported the case of the prosecution with regard to the
alleged offences of 120B, 148, 399 & 402 R/w. Section 149 of
IPC against the said accused and since in his cross-examination
the above said witness has clearly admitted that he has not at
all given any statement before the police then it has to be held
that the version of the above witness is of no help to the case of
the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all
reasonable doubt.
10. Secondly, though the prosecution has got examined
another material eye witness of CW-7, her version is of no help
to the case of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused
beyond all reasonable doubt as in her evidence she too has
simply deposed that on 23.08.2014 at about 11.15 p.m., the
police men had come to search for an amount of Rs.30 Crores
9
SC No.717/2017
in her house and on search nothing was found and hence they
went away.
11. And since the above witness i.e., CW-7/PW-2 has not
at all supported the case of the prosecution with regard to the
alleged offences of 120B, 148, 399 & 402 R/w. Section 149 of
IPC against the said accused and since in her cross-
examination itself the above said witness has clearly admitted
that she has not at all given any statement before the police
then it has to be held that the version of the above witness is of
no help to the case of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the
accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
12. Thirdly though the prosecution has got examined
panch witness i.e., CW-3 as PW-3, his version is also of no help
to the case of the prosecution as in his evidence he has turned
completely hostile by deposing that he has put his signature to
the panchanama of Ex.P.1 at the Police Station and he has not
at all seen the accused and no panchanama has been
10
SC No.717/2017
conducted before him and so also no materials were seized
before him.
13. Even though the above witness was thoroughly cross-
examined by the prosecution still nothing worth while has been
elicited to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable
doubt. And in fact in his cross-examination the above said
witness has clearly deposed that he has not at all given any
statement before the Police against the accused as per Ex.P.2
and Maerials of MOs-1 to 6 were not at all seized before him
under the panchanama of Ex.P.1.
14. Fourthly though the prosecution has got examined a
police official witness i.e., PSI/CW-1 as PW-4 and though he
has supported the case of the prosecution by deposing that on
the alleged day the accused were caught a plan to commit
dacoity in the house of CW-6 & CW-7 and as such they caught
hold of them and recovered the material objects MO-1 to 6
under the panchanama of Ex.P.1 before the panchs of CW-2 &
11
SC No.717/2017
3, his version is of no help to the case of the prosecution to
prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt as
his version with regard to the seizing of the material objects of
MOs-1 to 6 under the panchanam of Ex.P.1 is not at all
corroborated by the version of panch witness of CW-3/PW-3.
15. And lastly though the prosecution has got examined
the I.O. of the present case i.e., CW-13 as PW-5, his version is
also of no help to the case of the prosecution to prove the guilt
of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt as his version with
regard to the alleged incident is neither corroborated by the
material witness of CW-6 nor by CW-7.
16. And even otherwise since the version of the above
witnesses does not prove that the accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7 were
attempting to the commit the alleged crime & also does not
prove that the said accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7 had conceived the
design of committing dacoity & since in a ruling of 2003
Crl.L.J. 1997, it has been clearly held that 'To constitute an
12
SC No.717/2017
offence under section 399 and 402 of IPC, some act
amounting to preparation must be proved' & since in another
ruling of AIR 1993 SCW 2009, it was held that 'To constitute
an offence under sections 399 and 402 of IPC, the
prosecution must show that the accused have conceived
design of committing dacoity' then it has to be held in
unequivocal terms that the prosecution has failed to prove the
guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
17. So in view of the discussion made above, I am of the
opinion that since the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt
of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt with cogent
corroborative evidence of complainant, other official witness and
independent eye & panch witnesses and since there are lot of
variations and contradictions in the oral versions of PW-1 to 5
and since the prosecution has failed to prove the seizer of the
alleged MO's.1 to 6 from the custody of the said accused
through cogent independent eye and panch witnesses and since
in a ruling of 2006 Crl.L.J. 1775 it has been clearly held that
'In a case under Section 399 & 402 of IPC When no public
13
SC No.717/2017
persons were summoned to witness the incident and when
no signatures of the accused were obtained on seizer memo
& no copy there off were furnished to any of the accused
when the police did not recover the currency notes from
the accused then the same makes the prosecution story as
doubtful and the accused are entitled for acquittal' then I
am of the considered opinion that the prosecution has once
again failed to prove the guilt of the above accused beyond all
reasonable doubt and accordingly, I have answered the above
Point No.1 in the negative.
18. POINT No.4:- In view of the above reasons, I proceed
to pass the following:-
O R DE R
Acting under Section 235(1) of the
Cr.P.C., the accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7 are
hereby acquitted of the offences punishable
under Section 120B, 148, 399 & 402 R/w.
Section 149 of IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond of
accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7 stands cancelled.
14
SC No.717/2017
M.O.1 to 6 is hereby ordered to be
preserved to the trial of split up case against
the remaining absconding accused No.3, 5 &
6.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on the computer, typed by her, corrected, signed and
then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 11 th day of January, 2023).
(R.RAVI)
LXI Addl. C.C. & Sessions Judge,
BANGALORE CITY.
A NN E X U R E
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PROSECUTION:
P.W.1 Joseph
P.W.2 Smt.Rita Joseph
P.W.3 Venkatesh Poojari
P.W.4 Anjan Kumar.V
P.W.5 Venaktesh.T
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 Panchanama
Ex.P.1(a) Signature
Ex.P.2 Statement
Ex.P.3 Report
Ex.P.4 Sketch
Ex.P.5 FIR
Ex.P.5(a) Signature
Ex.P.6 Panchanama
Ex.P.6(a) Signature
Ex.P.7 P.F. No.163/2014
Ex.P.7(a) Signature
15
SC No.717/2017
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR DEFENCE: -
NIL
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR DEFENCE:-
NIL
MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION :-
MO-1 Long
MO-2 Knife
MO-3 &4 Iron rods (2 nos)
MO-5 Wooden club
MO-6 Chilli Power Packet
(R.RAVI)
LXI Addl. C.C. & Sessions Judge,
BANGALORE CITY.
Digitally signed
R by R RAVI
Date:
2023.01.12
RAVI 12:01:19
+0530
SC No.717/2017
11.01.2023
S-PP
A1&2-RS
A4-HT
A7-MDL
For Judgment
Judgment pronounced in the
open court (vide separate judgment)
with the following operative portion:
ORDER
Acting under Section 235(1) of the Cr.P.C., the accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7 are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 120B, 148, 399 & 402 R/w. Section 149 of IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond of accused No.1, 2, 4 & 7 stands cancelled.
M.O.1 to 6 is hereby ordered to be preserved to the trial of split up case against the remaining absconding accused No.3, 5 & 6.
(R.RAVI) LIX Addl. C.C. & Sessions Judge, BANGALORE CITY.
SC No.717/2017