Bangalore District Court
Vishal Raj vs Prem Kumar on 23 December, 2024
KABC030145392020
Presented on : 25.02.2020
Registered on : 26.02.2020
Decided on : 23.12.2024
Duration : 04y/09m/27days
IN THE COURT OF XLI ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, AT : BENGALURU
PRESIDED OVER BY TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA
B.A.,LL.B.,
XLI Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate
Bengaluru
Dated on this 23rd day of December 2024
C.C.No.3851/2020
COMPLAINANT : The State
by Cubbon Park Police Station
-V/s-
ACCUSED : 1. Prem Kumar,
S/o. Murugan, aged 29 years,
R/at. No.153/1, 3rd cross,
Vaderanahalli Layout,
Vidyaranyapura Post, Bengaluru.
2. Soundar Rajan,
S/o. Rajendran, aged 26 years,
R/at. No.43,New Sun MDS,
JC Road, Bengaluru.
3. Dore,
S/o. Balakrishna, aged 32 years,
R/at. No.22B, 2nd cross,
J.C.Road, Bengaluru.
2 C.C.No.3851/2020
Date of Commission of offence 18.07.2019
Date of report 21.07.2019
Date of arrest On 21.03.2020, accused No.1 to
3 appeared before the Court
and got enlarged themselves on
bail.
Name of the complainant Vishal Raj
Date of commencement 18.01.2022
of recording Evidence
Date of closing evidence 07.12.2024
Offences complained of U/Sec.363, 342, 323, 504, 506
R/w 34 of IPC.
Opinion of the Judge As per final orders
State Represented by Senior Asst.Public Prosecutor
Accused Represented by Sri.Gururaj.K., Advocate
JUDGMENT
[Delivered on 23.12.2024] The P.S.I of Cubbon Park Police Station has filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/Sec. 363, 342, 323, 504, 506 R/w 34 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of prosecution case is as follows:
On 18.07.2019 at 3.30p.m., the accused No.1 to 3 in furtherance of common intention kidnapped CW.1 by demanding money in a car bearing No.KA.03.AE.9660, when he was proceeding towards Mysore Sales International Ltd., by having 3 C.C.No.3851/2020 lunch at Airlines hotel Lavelle road, wrongfully confined him in the office of Prominence Brand Services Pvt. Ltd., from there he was taken to the Cow farm of Rajesh at Hullahalli, Kanainur, forcibly dragged him, caused hurt, abused him in a filthy language and threatened him to kill. On the basis of written information given by CW.1, the Cubbon Park police have registered this case in Cr.No.135/2019.
3. After the investigation, the IO filed charge sheet against the accused. The Court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable U/Sec. 363, 342, 323, 504, 506 R/w 34 of IPC.
4. On 21.03.2020, the accused No.1 to 3 appeared before the Court and got enlarged themselves on bail. The Court complied with Sec.207 of Cr.P.C., and furnished charge sheet copies to the accused.
5. The Court heard both the parties. As there were no grounds to discharge the accused No.1 to 3, the Court framed charges for the offences punishable 363, 342, 323, 504, 506 R/w 34 of IPC. The accused No. 1 to 3 did not plead guilty. They claimed to be tried. 4 C.C.No.3851/2020
6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined 4 witnesses as PW.1 to 4 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 12 documents. After the closure of the evidence of the prosecution, this court recorded the statements of the accused No.1 to 3 U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C., wherein, they denied the incriminating evidence led against them. They did not choose to lead their defense evidence.
7. I have heard the arguments of Senior APP and Sri. GK Advocate.
8. On the basis of allegations made against the accused the following points arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused in furtherance of common intention kidnapped CW.1 by demanding money in a car bearing No.KA.03.AE.9660 on 18.07.2019 at 3.30p.m., when he was proceeding towards Mysore Sales International Ltd., by having lunch at Airlines hotel, Lavelle road and thereby they have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.363 R/w 34 of IPC?5 C.C.No.3851/2020
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused in furtherance of common intention wrongfully confined CW.1 in the office of Prominence Brand Services Pvt.
Ltd., and from there he was taken to the Cow farm of Rajesh at Hullahalli, Kanainur and thereby they have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.342 R/w 34 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused in furtherance of common intention forcibly dragged CW.1, caused hurt and thereby they have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.323 R/w 34 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused in furtherance of common intention abused CW.1 in a filthy language and thereby they have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.504 R/w 34 of IPC?
6 C.C.No.3851/2020
5. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused in furtherance of common intention threatened CW.1 to kill and thereby they have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.506 R/w 34 of IPC?
6. What order?
9. My answers to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In Negative
Point No.2 : In Negative
Point No.3 : In Negative
Point No.4 : In Negative
Point No.5 : In Negative
Point No.6 : As per final orders for the following:
REASONS
Point No.1 to 5: As all these points are interrelated, I take all the five points together for common discussion to avoid repetition.
10. The burden is casted on the prosecution to prove that, the accused in furtherance of common intention kidnapped CW.1 by demanding money in a car bearing No.KA.03.AE.9660 on 18.07.2019 at 3.30p.m., when he was proceeding towards Mysore 7 C.C.No.3851/2020 Sales International Ltd., by having lunch at Airlines hotel, Lavelle road, wrongfully confined him in the office of Prominence Brand Services Pvt. Ltd., and from there he was taken to the Cow farm of Rajesh at Hullahalli, Kanainur, they forcibly dragged him, caused hurt, abused him in a filthy language and threatened him to kill.
11. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined the circumstantial witness/CW.7 as PW.1, the officer who arrested the accused/CW.11 as PW.2 , the officer who partly investigated the case/CW.9 as PW.3 and investigating officer/CW.12 as PW4 and got marked the portion of the statement of PW.1 as Ex.P.1, written information/complaint as Ex.P.2, FIR as Ex.P.3, report given by Ravindra as Ex.P.4, seizure mahazer as Ex.P.5, seizure mahazer as Ex.P.6, report given by Ravindra as Ex.P.7, wound certificate as Ex.P.8, spot mahazer as Ex.P.9, CDR of accused No.1 as Ex.P.10, photographs as Ex.P.11 and 12.
12. CW.7/PW.1- Rajesh Bagarecha, in his evidence has stated that, he is acquainted with accused No.1. But, he is not acquainted 8 C.C.No.3851/2020 with other accused and CW.1 to 6. He does not know anything about this case. He has not given any statement to the police.
13. CW.11/PW.2-Shivakumar, in his evidence has stated that, while he was working as ASI at Cubbon Park police station on 21.07.2019 at 6.30p.m., the CW.1 came to the station and gave Ex.P.2 complaint. On the basis of which, he registered Ex.P.3.
14. CW.9/PW.3 - Raghavendra.C., in his evidence has stated that, while he was working as head constable at Cubbon Park police station on 22.07.2019, the PSI deputed him and CW.10 to trace out the accused of this case. By contacting the informants, they visited Vaderahalli layout, Vidyaranyapura, arrested accused No.1 at 1.15p.m., and produced him before the PSI at 2.15p.m. Accordingly, the CW.8 gave a report in this regard. On 30.07.2019, they learnt that the accused No.2 and 3 are available at their residents. Hence, they visited #43, Near Sun MDC, J.C.Road, Bengaluru, arrested accused No.2 and 3 and produced them before the PSI at 5p.m.Accordingly, the CW.8 gave a report in this regard. He has identified accused No.1 to 3.
9 C.C.No.3851/2020
15. CW.12/PW.4-Renuka J.M., in her evidence has stated that, while she was working as PSI at Cubbon Park police station, on 22.07.2019 she recorded further statement of PW.1. On the same day at 2.15 p.m., the CW.8 and PW.3 produced accused No.1 and in turn, the CW.8 gave Ex.P.4 report. Hence, she followed arrest procedure and recorded the statement of PW.3. On the same day, she recorded the voluntary statement of accused No.1. She seized mobile and purse of CW.1 from accused No.1 by drawing Ex.P.5 mahazer from 4p.m. to 5p.m., in the presence of CW.2 and 5. On 24.07.2019, the CW.6 produced KA.03.AE.9660 Toyota Etios car. Hence, she seized the same by drawing Ex.P.6 mahazer in between 11 a.m. to 12p.m., in the presence of CW.4 and 5. Subsequently, she recorded the statements of CW.4 and 5. On 30.07.2019 at 5p.m., the CW.8 and PW.3 produced accused No.2 and 3 and in turn the CW.8 gave Ex.P.7 report. On the same day, she released accused No.2 and 3 on station bail. On 02.08.2019 she collected Ex.P.8 wound certificate from Bowring & Lady Curzon hospital. On 17.10.2019 the CW.8 drawn Ex.P.9 spot mahazer and 10 C.C.No.3851/2020 produced the same before her. On 10.01.2020 she collected Ex.P.10/CDR of accused No.1. Ex.P.11 is the photograph of the car. Ex.P.12 is the photograph, which was taken at the time of releasing purse and phone to CW.1. By completing the investigation, she filed charge sheet against the accused. She has identified the accused.
16. On the basis of Ex.P.2-written information given by CW.1 on 21.07.2019, the Cubbon Park police have registered this case, investigated the matter and filed charge sheet against the accused. In Ex.P.2, the CW.1 has explained the reason and the manner in which, Pavan Kumar and others kidnapped him on 18.07.2014, where they confined him and how they treated him. He has mentioned the vehicle number, which was used for commission of the offence. Likewise, he has mentioned the name of the person, who was present at the farm, where he was confined.
17. In order to ascertain the correctness of the allegations made in Ex.P.2, this Court had issued repeated summons, non-bailable 11 C.C.No.3851/2020 warrants and proclamations against CW. 1 to 6, 8. Inspite of it, the prosecution has not secured their presence. Hence, by noting the absence of the accused and age of the case, the Court dropped them from examination. In the present case, the complainant/victim did not appear before the Court to explain the reasons for filing Ex.P.2 and approaching Cubbon Park police.
18. In Ex.P.2, the complainant has stated that, Rajesh was watching him and the offenders and he was not stopping the accused, when they were ill treating him. But, the said Rajesh, who is examined as PW.1 before the Court has stated that, he does not know anything about this case. He denied that, the accused confined CW.1 in his Rajesh cow Farm.
19. In this case, except PW.1, other witnesses are police witnesses and their version is not corroborated with the oral evidence of any independent witnesses including the complainant. In the present case, no pancha witnesses appeared before the Court to say that, the police seized purse and mobile of CW.1 from accused No.1 by drawing Ex.P.5 mahazer. Likewise, 12 C.C.No.3851/2020 no pancha witnesses are appeared before the Court to say that, they have seen the police seizing KA.03.AE.9660 Etios car in their presence by drawing Ex.P.6 mahazer, which was produced by CW.6.
20. As per Ex.P.9, the CW.8 allegedly drawn Ex.P.9 mahazer at three various places i.e., near the compound of Mysore Sales International Ltd., inside the office of Prominence Brand Service Pvt. Ltd., and Rajesh's cow farm house, situated at Hullahalli, Kanainur, which is 40 k.m., away from Mysore. But, neither the author nor the pancha witnesses appeared before the Court to depose about the contents of Ex.P.9-spot mahazer. The PW.1 being the owner of farm house, did not whisper anything about Ex.P.9.
21. In the present case no independent witnesses appeared before the Court to substantiate the case of the prosecution. In the absence of oral evidence of any independent witnesses and evidence of victim cum complainant, the evidence led by PW.2 to 4 appears to be baseless.
13 C.C.No.3851/2020
22. The charge sheet is accompanied by a wound certificate issued by Bowring & Lady Curzon hospital, Bengaluru, which is marked as Ex.P.8. As per this document, the CW.1 was taken to the hospital on 21.07.2019 at 8.50p.m. On examination, the doctor did not notice any fresh external injuries on the body of CW.1. Moreover, there is a reference in that document stating that, the CW.1 refused for further investigations. As alleged in Ex.P.2, if the CW.1 was assaulted by the accused, he ought to have followed the advises of the doctor and undergone other tests. But, he did not do so. This aspect makes the Court to doubt the genuineness of this case.
23. The prosecution has not placed any convincing evidence before the Court to hold that, the CW.1 was kidnapped by the accused on 18.07.2019 in Etios car, he was wrongfully confined at the office of Prominence Brand Service Pvt. Ltd., and Rajesh's cow farm house, situated at Hullahalli, Kanainur, which is 40 k.m., away from Mysore and during that period, he was assaulted, abused and threatened by the accused.
14 C.C.No.3851/2020
24. Ex.P.10 is the alleged Call Detail Report of accused No.1. From the contents of Ex.P.10 it appears that, IO sought details of 7892263069, 6360542566 and 9900999001. But, the PW.4 being the IO did not produce any documents before the Court to show, who is the service provider of those phone numbers and who was allotted with those numbers. In the absence of such details, Ex.P.10 is no way helpful to the case of the prosecution.
25. Therefore, there is no cogent evidence on record to show the involvement of the accused in the alleged crime. There is no material or evidence on record to connect the accused with the alleged crime. Therefore, the evidence led by PW.1 to 4 will not come to aid of the prosecution to hold the accused guilty of the offences. From the oral evidence led by PW.1 to 4, the charges levelled against the accused are not proved.
26. Thus, the prosecution has failed to prove that, the accused in furtherance of common intention kidnapped CW.1 by demanding money in a car bearing No.KA.03.AE.9660 on 18.07.2019 at 3.30p.m., when he was proceeding towards Mysore 15 C.C.No.3851/2020 Sales International Ltd., by having lunch at Airlines hotel, Lavelle road, wrongfully confined him in the office of Prominence Brand Services Pvt. Ltd., and from there he was taken to the Cow farm of Rajesh at Hullahalli, Kanainur, they forcibly dragged him, caused hurt, abused him in a filthy language and threatened him to kill. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 to 5 in Negative. Point No.6: For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER By exercising the powers conferred U/Sec.248[1] of Cr.P.C., the accused No. 1 to 3 are acquitted from the charges of 363, 342, 323, 504, 506 R/w 34 of IPC.
The bail bonds executed by the accused No. 1 to 3 stands cancelled.
The bonds executed by the accused No.1 to 3 U/Sec.437[A] of Cr.P.c., will be in force till the completion of the appeal period.
The property seized under PF No.75/2019 vide item No.1 to 3 i.e., purse, 16 C.C.No.3851/2020 Micro Max phone and I phone are already released to the interim custody of CW.1. The property seized under PF.No.76/2019 i.e., KA.03.AE.9660 Etios car is already released to the interim custody of its RC owner. That order is made absolute.Digitally signed by
TATTANDA TATTANDA
DAMAYANTI DAMAYANTI SOMAIAH
Date: 2024.12.23
SOMAIAH 17:46:21 +0530
23.12.2024 [TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA]
XLI A.C.J.M., BENGALURU
17 C.C.No.3851/2020
ANNEXURE
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
PW.1 : Rajesh Bagarecha PW.2 : Shiva Kumar PW.3 : Raghavendra.C PW.4 : Renuka J.M.,
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 : Portion of the statement of PW.1 Ex.P.2 : Written information/Complaint Ex.P.2[a] : Signature of PW.2 Ex.P.3 : FIR Ex.P.3[a] : Signature of PW.2 Ex.P.4 : Report given by CW.8 Ex.P.4[a] : Signature of PW.4 Ex.P.5 : Seizure mahazar Ex.P.5[a] : Signature of PW.4 Ex.P.6 : Seizure mahazar Ex.P.6[a] : Signature of PW.4 Ex.P.7 : Report given by CW.8 Ex.P.7[a] : Signature of PW.4 Ex.P.8 : Wound certificate Ex.P.8[a] : Signature of PW.4 Ex.P.9 : Spot mahazar Ex.P.9[a] : Signature of PW.4 18 C.C.No.3851/2020 Ex.P.10 : CDR Ex.P.11 : Photograph of Etios car Ex.P.12 : Photograph of mobile & purse LIST OF M.O's MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION : NIL LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE ACCUSED : NIL LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE ACCUSED : NIL ........................................................................................
Dictated on : 20.12.2024
Transcribed on : 21.12.2024
checked on : 23.12.2024
Signed on : 23.12.2024
[TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA]
XLI A.C.J.M, BENGALURU
Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app "eCourts Services" from Android or iOS