Bangalore District Court
The State Of Karnataka Through vs 2. Lingaraju on 1 October, 2022
1 CC.No.10247/17
KABC030233972017
IN THE COURT OF XXIV ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF OCTOBER 2022
C.C. No.10247/17
Present: SRI. B.C.CHANDRASHEKAR
B.A., LL.B.,
XXIV ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
COMPLAINANT : The State of Karnataka through
Hanumanthanagar Police Station
Rep.by Sr.APP
V/s.
Accused 2. Lingaraju, 44 yrs,
R/at.No.1267/A, 9th main road, 6th
cross, Srinivasnagar, Bengaluru.
3. Ananth, 38 yrs, R/at.No.144, 10th
cross, Javaregowda,
Hanumanthanagar, Bengaluru.
2 CC.No.10247/17
4. Vishwanath.V.K, 44 yrs,
No.30/60, Pipeline road, BSK 1st
stage, 2nd block, Hanumanthanagar,
Bengaluru.
5. Mahadeva (split up)
6. Shivakumar @ tuku (split up)
7. Shivakumar @ Prem, (split up)
8. Shivakumar @ Shivu, (split up)
1. Govindaraju (Abated)
Rep.by Sri.NMP, Advocate
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT : 12/09/2016
OF OFFENCE
DATE OF ARREST OF THE : Accused No.2 to 4 are on bail.
ACCUSED
OFFENCES ALLEGED : U/s.143, 147, 427, 435 r/w.149
of IPC and Sec.2 of P.D.L.P.Act
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT : 08/09/2022
OF EVIDENCE
DATE OF CLOSING OF : 08/09/2022
EVIDENCE
OPINION OF THE JUDGE : Found not guilty
(B.C.CHANDRASHEKAR)
XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
3 CC.No.10247/17
: J U D G M E N T :
The PI of Hanumanthanagar Police station has filed
chargesheet against accused persons for the offences
punishable u/s.143, 147, 427, 435 r/w.149 of IPC and Sec.2
of P.D.L.P.Act.
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are
that on 12/9/16 there was an Order of Hon'ble Supreme
Court with regard to Cauvery River Water dispute, on that day
the accused persons with common object to commit an
offence at 7.00 pm., formed an unlawful assembly by holding
deadly weapons, committed rioting at 50 ft., road, Shakthi
Bar and Restaurant against the order of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Cauvery river water dispute, forcibly closed the
shops, put fire to paper and tyres and also committed
mischief by setting fire to two wheeler belonging to CW 2
bearing No.TN 65 T 7970, caused loss of Rs.45000/ to him.
Further the accused persons pelted stones at Mutthoot
finance situated at Vidyapeetha circle belonging to CW 3 and
caused loss of Rs.10000/ to them, also pelted stones at the
shop of CW 4 viz., Devi Glass shop and caused loss of
Rs.15000/ to them and also pelted stones at the Poorvika
shop of CW 5 and caused loss of Rs.10000/ to them.
4 CC.No.10247/17
Further the accused gone near the shop of CW 1, asked the
CW 1 to give drinks, when the CW 1 refused, set fire to rolling
shutter and window and also damaged the CCTV camera
belonging to CW 1 and caused loss of Rs.5000/ to CW 1 and
committed the offences u/s.143, 147, 427, 435 r/w.149 of
IPC and Sec.2 of P.D.L.P.Act.
3. On the basis of the complaint of the CW 1, this crime
has been registered by Hanumanthanagar Police Station.
During the crime stage, the accused no.1 to 3 were arrested
and produced before the court and thereafter, the accused
no.1 to through their counsels filed the bail application.
Accordingly, they have released on bail. Likewise, the accused
no.4 to 8 have also appeared before the court through their
counsel and filed the bail application. Accordingly, they have
released on bail. After investigation, Investigating officer has
submitted the chargesheet. The cognizance for the said
offences is taken.
4. At this juncture, accused no.1 did not appear before
the court. On issuance of NBW, it was reported that the accused
no.1 has dead. Hence, case against accused no.1 is ordered to
be Abated vide orders dtd: 22/2/22. Likewise, the accused
no.5 to 8 did not appear before the court. I nspite of issue of
number of NBWs, the presence of accused no.5 to 8 could not be
5 CC.No.10247/17
secured. Hence, case against accused no.5 to 8 is ordered to
be split up vide orders dtd: 22/2/22. The copies of the
prosecution papers have furnished to the accused nos.2 to 4
as contemplated u/s.207 of Cr.P.C., After being heard the
arguments before charge, as there were no grounds to
discharge them, charge for the offences u/s.143, 147, 427,
435 r/w.149 of IPC and Sec.2 of P.D.L.P.Act have been framed
& read over, explained to the accused no.2 to 4 in the
language best known to them. The accused no.2 to 4 have
not pleaded guilty and claims to be tried. Hence, the case
taken up for trial.
5. In order to prove the guilt of the accused no.2 to 4, the
prosecution has examined 2 witnesses as PW 1 and 2 out of
29 witnesses as cited in the chargesheet. One document has
been marked as Ex.P.1. Since the PW 1 and 2 turned hostile
and the material witnesses did not turn up before the court to
give evidence, there is no incriminating evidence against the
accused no.2 to 4, examination of accused no.2 to 4 u/s.313
of Cr.P.C., has been dispensed with.
6. Heard the arguments of learned APP and counsel for
accused no.2 to 4. Perused.
7. On the basis of the above, the following points have
6 CC.No.10247/17
arises for my consideration :
1) Whether prosecution proves beyond
reasonable doubt that the accused
persons with common object to commit
an offence on 12/9/16 at 7.00 pm.,
formed an unlawful assembly by
holding deadly weapons, committed
rioting at 50 ft., road, Shakthi Bar and
Restaurant against the order of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Cauvery river water
dispute and thereby have committed
the offences punishable U/secs.143,
147 r/w 149 of IPC ?
2) Whether prosecution proves beyond
reasonable doubt that on the same day,
time and place the accused persons
committed mischief by setting fire to two
wheeler belonging to CW 2 bearing
No.TN 65 T 7970 caused loss of
Rs.45000/ to him, pelted stones at
Mutthoot finance situated at
Vidyapeetha circle belonging to CW 3
and caused loss of Rs.10000/ to him,
also pelted stones at the shop of CW 4
and caused loss of Rs.15000/ to him,
pelted stones at the Poorvika shop of
CW 5 and caused loss of Rs.10000/ to
him, damaged the CCTV camera
belongingto CW 1 and caused loss of
Rs.5000/ to CW 1 and thereby have
committed an offence punishable U/s
427 IPC ?
7 CC.No.10247/17
3) Whether prosecution proves beyond
reasonable doubt that on the same day,
time and place the accused persons
committed mischief by setting fire to the
shop of CW 1 and caused loss of
Rs.5000/ to CW 1 and thereby have
committed an offence punishable U/s
435 IPC ?
4) What order?
8. My answer to the above points is as under;
Point No.1 to 3 In the Negative
Point No.4As per final order for the following :
REASONS
9. Point No.1 to 3 : Since all these points are interlinked,
I have taken them together for common discussion in order to
avoid the repetition. According to the prosecution, accused
no.2 to 4 have committed an offences u/s.143, 147, 427, 435
r/w.149 of IPC and Sec.2 of P.D.L.P.Act. In order to prove the
guilt of the accused no.2 to 4, the prosecution has examined
the CW 9 as PW.1. The PW 1 has identified the mahazar and
he has identified his signature and it is marked at Ex.P.1. But
he has deposed that he does not know the contents of the
same and the police have not seized anything in his presence.
Thus he has turned hostile. The Sr.APP has cross examined
8 CC.No.10247/17
him by treating him as hostile witness but nothing has
elicited from his mouth about drawing up of seizure mahazar.
10. The prosecution further examined another seizure
mahazar witness CW 10 as PW 2, he has identified his
signature and it is marked at Ex.P.1. But he has deposed that
he does not know the contents of the same and the police
have not seized anything in his presence. Thus he has also
turned hostile. The Sr.APP has cross examined him by
treating him as hostile witness but nothing has elicited from
his mouth about drawing up of seizure mahazar
11. It is significant to note here that in order to secure
the presence of the complainant and other material witnesses
CW 1 to 8, 11 to 20, this court issued number of summons,
but their presence could not be secured. This court has also
issued the NBW including the proclamation against the
material witness such as CW 1 to 8, 11 to 20, but
Investigating officer has failed to execute the same and keep
present them before the court. Hence, with no option CW 1 to
8, 11 to 20 have dropped with a liberty to the prosecution to
produce the witnesses at any time without filing any recall
application. Inspite of that the prosecution has not make use
of the opportunity and examined the other material witnesses.
9 CC.No.10247/17
Here the PW.1 and 2 being seizure mahazar witnesses turned
hostile. Since the complainant and other material witnesses
did not turn up to give evidence, naturally the strong doubt
would arise in the mind of the court. In a criminal justice
system, if a tiny doubt arises in the mind of the court, benefit
of doubt shall be extended to the accused no.2 to 4. In this
case, not only tiny doubt but the strong doubt arise in the
mind of the court, because the victims did not appear before
the court to give evidence and the seizure mahazar witnesses
have not supported the case of the prosecution. Hence, the
prosecution has utterly failed to prove the guilt of the
accused persons beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, in my
opinion it is a fit case to extend benefit of doubt to the
accused persons. Accordingly point under reference
answered in the Negative.
12. POINT NO.2 :
For the aforesaid reason and discussion, I proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
Acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused no.2 to 4 are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/s.143, 147, 427, 435 r/w.149 of IPC and Sec.2 of P.D.L.P.Act.
10 CC.No.10247/17The bail bond executed by the accused no.2 to 4 stands cancelled. However, Accused no.2 to 4 shall execute personal bond of Rs.50,000/ each by undertaking to appear before the appellate Court, if any appeal is filed.
It is not a fit case to award victim compensation as provided U/s.357(1) of Cr.P.C., Office is directed to keep the original file and property in split up case registered against accused No.5 to 8.
(Dictated to the stenographer, script transcribed by her and then corrected directly on computer and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 1st day of October 2022).
(B.C.Chandrashekar) XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the Prosecution:
PW1 : Siddaraju PW 2 : Narayana
Documents marked for the Prosecution:
Ex.P1 : Mahazar
Ex.P1(a) : Signature
11 CC.No.10247/17
Witnesses examined for the accused: NIL Documents marked for the accused: NIL (B.C.Chandrashekar) XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.