Bangalore District Court
State vs Ramachandra.K on 13 September, 2021
1 CC.No.13793/2015
IN THE COURT OF V ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT: BANGALORE
Dated this the 13th day of June, 2021
PRESENT
Sri. RAJESH N. HOSAMANE B.Sc.ML.
V ACMM BENGALURU
CC. No.13793/2015
Complainant : State
Rep. PSI Basaveswarnagar
Police Station, Bangalore.
(by Sr.A.P.P)
-Vs-
Accused : Ramachandra.K
S/o Krishnojirao
Aged about 67 years
R/at No.351, 5th Main,
3rd Stage, 3rd Block,
Basaveswarnagar, Bengaluru
(By Sri.N.M.N Advocate)
1. Date of commencement 13.04.2015
of offence
2. Arrest of the accused Accused is on bail.
3. Name of the complainant M.Shashikumar
4. Date of closing of 07.08.2011
evidence
5. Offences complained of Sec.354A of IPC
6. Opinion of the Judge Accused found guilty
2 CC.No.13793/2015
7. Complainant by The Learned Sr.APP .
8. Accused defence by Advocate Sri.N.M.N.
JUDGMENT
This case emanates from the charge sheet submitted by the PSI of Basaveshwarnagar police station against accused for the offence punishable under section Sec.354A of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as under:
On 13.04.2015 at about 11.05 am within the jurisdiction of Basaveshwaranagara Police Station when CW.4 came to CET coaching class at No.351, 5 th Main, 3rd Stage, 3rd Block, Basaveswarnagar at 11-30 a.m, around 2- 30 p.m. the accused called CW.4 to the upper floor to show the new coaching classes and rooms, and accused advanced towards CW.4, touched her cheeks, kissed two times and he inappropriately touched her body and thereby committed an offence punishable U/Sec.354A of IPC.3 CC.No.13793/2015
3. The complainant has lodged complaint against accused. On basis said complaint the police have registered the case in Cr.No.180/2015 and forwarded FIR to this court. During the course of investigation the accused got enlarged on bail. Thereafter, the police conducted investigation and filed charge sheet against the accused for the above said offence.
4. On the basis of materials on record cognizance of the offence U/Sec.354A of IPC has been taken and issued summons to the accused. The accused appeared through his counsel Sri.N.M.N. After completion of investigation, investigating officer filed charge sheet against the accused person for the above said offence. Towards compliance U/Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. copy of charge sheet has been supplied to the accused. Charge is framed, read over and explained to the accused person in the language known to him. The accused person pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4 CC.No.13793/2015
5. The prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of the accused person has examined PW.1 to PW.6 and got marked the documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P3 and closed his side. Statement of accused U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded. The accused denied the incriminating evidence that appeared against him and DW.1 is examined as defence evidence.
6. Based on the above facts and circumstances on record, the following points arisen for the consideration of the court:
1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that On 13.04.2015 at about 11.05 am within the jurisdiction of Basaveshwaranagara Police Station when CW.4 came to CET coaching class at No.351, 5th Main, 3rd Stage, 3rd Block, Basaveswarnagar at 11-30 a.m, around 2-30 p.m. the accused called CW.4 to the upper floor to show the new coaching classes and rooms, and accused advanced towards CW.4, touched her cheeks, kissed two times and he inappropriately touched her body and thereby committed an offence punishable U/Sec.354A of IPC
2) What order?5 CC.No.13793/2015
7. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record.
8. My findings to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the Affirmative
Point No.2 : As per final order
for the following:
REASONS
9. Point No.1 : The prosecution in order to prove
guilt against the accused totally examined 6 witnesses out of 7 charge sheet witnesses and got marked three documents as per Ex.P1 to Ex.P3. CW.1/PW.1, who is complainant and father of victim (CW.4) by name Shashikumar deposed in his chief examination that he know the accused, he conducts CET coaching classes. He further deposed that, CW.2 and CW.3 are his colleagues, CW.4 is his daughter and CW.5 is his wife. Further deposed that his daughter i.e., CW.4 is studying PUC Science second year in Carmel College. He met accused on April, 2015, 3rd week for CET examination. He has given Rs.6,000/- advance to accused as fees. On 04.04.2015 classes were scheduled from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. The accused 6 CC.No.13793/2015 is running the classes. On 13.04.2015 at about 11-30 a.m. CW.4 went to tuition class of run by accused, classes were upto 2.30 p.m. He further deposed that, on that day accused taken CW.4 to the upper floor to show her the new class rooms. Then the accused touched body of CW.4 inappropriately and he tried to hug her. The accused sexually harassed CW.4. He further deposed that CW.4 narrated the said fact to him, then he has lodged the complaint. Thereafter police conducted mahazar on the spot and taken his signature.
10. In the cross-examination PW.1 deposed that he is Engineering Graduate working in Flipkart from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. everyday. CW.2 and CW.3 are his neighbours. He knows them for the last 10 years. He came to know that accused is conducting CET coaching classes from his wife's friend's son. He met accused in the month of April, 2015. He has not taken receipt for Rs.6,000/-. Accused is residing in the second floor of the coaching center. He further deposed that, he has went to police station two 7 CC.No.13793/2015 days after lodging complaint. Since CW.2 and 3 are his friends and therefore he has mentioned them as witnesses. He has not taken CW.4 to police station in order to lodge complaint.
11. CW.4 who is victim namely Aishwarya D/o Shashikumar is examined as PW.2. In her evidence she deposed that, the complainant is her father, CW.5 is her mother. The accused conducting CET coaching classes. She is studying Second PUC in Carmel College. She further deposed that, in the first week of April 2015 her father contacted accused for the coaching class and her father paid Rs.6,000/- advance as fees. From 04.04.2015 classes were scheduled daily from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. On 13.04.2015 at 11-30 a.m. she went to tuition classe and attended upto 2.30 p.m. The accused asked her to go for lunch. She told the accused that as there is likelihood of rain and therefore she will finish her classes then she go home. Then accused told her that, he is going to show that new classrooms in 3rd floor. When both went upper 8 CC.No.13793/2015 floor the accused touched her cheeks and kissed her two times. He inappropriately touched her body and tired to hug her. Then she screamed and ran away and came to ground floor. Thereafter she narrated the story to her father, then his father lodged police complaint.
12. In her cross-examination she deposed that she has taken PUC exams in the year 2015 and she has failed in the examination. Marks Card of CW.2 is marked as Ex.D1. Her parents know that she has failed in the examination but still they have admitted her to tuition classes. She denied the suggestion that, the accused told her father that he will take the fees only after looking at the performance of his daughter. She deposed that, she attended tuition classes for 10 months. On 13.04.2015 she went to tuition at 12 p.m. She denied the suggestion that the accused told her to bring her father since she is not attended the classes regularly. She admitted that the accused is running tuition classes in car shed. She admitted that the accused and his family members were 9 CC.No.13793/2015 residing in second floor of the said building. At 12-30 p.m. wife of accused is present in the home. PW.2 admitted that in order to go to 3 rd floor they have to go from the steps situated infront of door of second floor. She further deposed that when accused tried to touch her cheeks she has not screamed. She admitted that she has not went to police station to lodge complaint.
13. CW.2 namely Mohan S/o Karigowda, who is panchanama witness is examined as PW.3. In his evidence he turned hostile and not supported the case of prosecution. He deposed that he is fruit vendor, police have taken his signature 2-3 years ago. He do not know the contents of mahazar i.e. Ex.P2. In his cross- examination he denied the suggestion that on 14.04.2015 police drawn mahazar in his presence.
14. CW.5 i.e., mother of victim (CW.4) namely Srividya W/o Shashikumar deposed as PW.4. In her evidence she deposed that, CW.1 is her husband. Cw.4 is her daughter. Her daughter is attending coaching classes conducted by 10 CC.No.13793/2015 accused. on 13.04.2015 at 11-30 a.m. her daughter went to tuition class. She came back to house at 2-30 p.m. In the evening it came to her knowledge that accused has misbehaved with her daughter. That the accused touched the cheek of her daughter and he tried to hug her. Her daughter narated the incident at night. Then she called the accused and told him to behave properly. She is not interested to proceed the matter further.
15. CW.6/PW.6 namely Ravikumar S/o Mallikarjun is brother of the complainant and he deposed that when CW.4 went to tuition class run by accused, the accused taken CW.4 to 3rd floor in order to show her the new class rooms and he has kissed her two times and tried to hug her. He tried to sexually harass her. On that day CW.4 is crying in the room, when they enquired she told the incident. Therefore they lodged complaint. In his cross- examination he deposed that CW.1 is his brother and they are residing in the same building. On 2-30 p.m. when CW.4 came to his house he was present there. When he 11 CC.No.13793/2015 opened the door of the room CW.4 is crying. They enquired and she told what happened to her, thereafter they lodged complaint. CW.4 was not came to police station to lodge complaint.
16. CW.7 Mallikarjun S/o Basavarajappa, who is PSI of Basaveswaranagar Police Station deposed that on 10.04.2015 at about 9 p.m. CW.1 lodged complaint and he has registered FIR, on the same day he visited the spot and drawn mahazar. He has taken statement of CW.1 to 5 and he sent notice to accused and enquired him and released him on bail. After completion of investigation filed charge sheet.
17. After recording of 313 statement son of accused has examined himself as DW.1. DW.1 namely Ajay Rao S/o K.Ramachandra Rao in his evidence deposed that accused is his father. He visit his father's house on holidays. Sunday and Monday are holidays for him. On 13.04.2015 at 10-30 a.m. he visited his father's house at 12-30 p.m. He parked his car in front of his father's 12 CC.No.13793/2015 house. Tuition Classes can be seen from the road since it is car shed and all the students are clearly visible from the road. Around 12-00 p.m. to 12-30 p.m. when he is parking his car in front of the house, his father is talking to a lady student. His father telling her that she is not attending classes regularly, not studying properly, therefore she shall come tomorrow along with her parents. He further deposed that, then he went to upper floor at about 9-30 p.m. When he intending to return his house the girl to which his father gave warning came and she stated that she will bring her parents tomorrow and she told that she has came to take back her books. His father gave her books then she went to home. In his cross- examination DW.1 deposed that his father is running tuition classes in the garage of first floor. Building consists only two floors i.e., ground floor and first floor. On 13.04.2015 there is construction work of the building is going on. His father is BE Mechanical Graduate. He do not know whether he has taken permission to conduct tuition class or not? He teaches Physics, Chemistry and 13 CC.No.13793/2015 Maths and also giving tuitions about CET Examinations. One month before the examination, students are taking coaching for CET exams. On 13.04.2015, CW.4 is only present in his house. Her name is Aishwarya. He denied the suggestion that her father has taken her to 3 rd floor and touched her cheeks and kissed her two times and he tired to hug her, inappropriately touch her.
18. The Ld.Sr.APP argued that, victim is a girl, aged about 18 years, when victim was alone and sitting in the ground floor, taking advantage of her loneliness the accused taken her to 3rd floor of the building in the pretext of showing her the building. Initially he touched the chin and the accused stated to her that, she is beautiful, her cheeks are good. Thereafter, he kissed on the cheeks of the victim. When the victim came back to home, her father and mother have enquired her since she is sad. On enquiry she revealed the incident taken place to her parents. The father of victim has filed the complaint. 14 CC.No.13793/2015
19. It is further argued by the Ld.Sr.APP that, the incident taken place within 4 corners of the wall. If there are eye witnesses this incident could not have taken place. There is nothing to disbelieve the version of prosecution. Victim, her father, mother and her uncle have deposed in support of prosecution. DW.1 in his evidence has confirmed the presence of victim in the place of incident. Hence Ld.Sr.APP requested the court to sentence the accused with maximum punishment.
20. Ld. Counsel for accused argued that, as per the prosecution the incident has taken place at 2-30 p.m. but the complaint was lodged at 9-30 p.m. though, the police station is only 1 K.M. away from the house of complainant. In the statement given before the police it is mentioned that, the accused has taken the victim to the 3rd floor of the building, infact the building consists only two floors. In the statement everybody stated that, the accused kissed victim in the 3rd floor, but the spot panchanama was conducted in the first floor of the 15 CC.No.13793/2015 building. CW.2 mahazar witness has not supported the case of prosecution.
21. He further argued that, CW.1 father of victim, CW.4 (victim), CW.5 mother of victim and CW.6 who is uncle of victim in their statement stated that, the accused touched the cheeks of victim and he kissed twice to her cheeks and he also touched the body of victim inappropriately. But in the complaint CW.1 has mentioned that, the accused tried to hug her and sexually abused her. Further it is mentioned in the complaint that, the victim screamed and ran away. But in her cross- examination victim CW.4 deposed that, she has not screamed when accused touched her. He further argued that, there is lot of discrepancies in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. The present complaint is filed by complainant on the say of his daughter since the accused has scolded her because the victim is not attentive in the class, she is not studying properly. Therefore, accused told CW.4 that next time she should come along with her 16 CC.No.13793/2015 father. Enraged by this CW.4 has given false information before her father and her father has given complaint on the basis false accusation of his daughter. The accused is aged 75 years and he is teaching the poor students and distributing books from the fees he received from the economically sound parents. There is no iota of evidence in order to come to the conclusion that the accused has committed the aforesaid offence. Hence, prayed to acquit the accused in the interest of justice and equity.
22. Evidence of the witnesses is already discussed. Though there is some discrepancies in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, But CW.1/PW.1 i.e. complainant, CW.6/PW.6 namely Ravikumar, who is uncle of victim have clearly deposed that the accused has touched the victim inappropriately. PW.1 deposed as per his complaint but he has not stated in his evidence that, the accused has kissed the victim. Victim in her evidence clearly deposed that, the accused touched her cheeks and he touched inappropriately and kissed her two times. The 17 CC.No.13793/2015 accused has tried to hug her and he sexually abused her. CW.6/PW.6 uncle of victim has also deposed as per the evidence of CW.4. Though, there are minor discrepancies like the victim has not screamed when accused sexually abused her and she has not went to police station to lodge complaint along with her are not helpful to the accused. From the evidence on record it is clear that, on 13.04.2015 the victim went to the house of accused for tuition class. This fact is also confirmed by the evidence of DW.1 namely Ajay Rao, who is son of accused. In the statement of witnesses it is mentioned that, the incident has taken place in the 3rd floor. It is contention of the accused that, the building consisting of only two floors. Therefore, the case is imaginary one. In the statement mentioning of the place of offence is the 3 rd floor is not sole criteria to come to the conclusion that accused has not committed the offence. The victim is aged about 18 years, why she will make such allegation against the accused, who is aged 75 years and the said allegation will also affect her reputation as well. Only in order to take 18 CC.No.13793/2015 revenge against accused No.1 the victim has concocted the story is not believable one. No women will falsely allege against any person which will also affect her reputation and character. Only small discrepancies in the evidence of prosecution will not come to the rescue of accused. The evidence of the victim is very firm and she withstood the cross-examination. As pointed out by the Ld.Sr.APP the offence taken place within four corners of the wall, if there are eye witnesses this incident could not have taken place. The only eye witness to the incident is the victim herself. She has clearly deposed what the accused done to her. As per her information the complaint is given by her father. The father, mother and uncle have deposed as per the information given by CW.4. Therefore, there may be minor discrepancies in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, but main witness in this case i.e. the victim has unequivocally deposed in her evidence that, the accused has sexually abused her. The evidence of DW.1 i.e., son of accused clearly goes to show that, the victim was present at the place of incident at the 19 CC.No.13793/2015 time of alleged offence. Thus, the aforesaid discussion made it clear that the prosecution has successfully proved that the accused has committed the offence punishable U/Sec. 354A of IPC. Hence, I answer Point No.1 in the Affirmative.
23.Point No.3: In the light of finding given on Point No.1, I find that accused is guilty and in the result I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under section 248(2) of Cr.P.C. Accused is hereby convicted for the offence punishable under Section 354A of IPC.
(Rajesh N. Hosamane) V ACMM, Bengaluru Hearing on sentence The Ld.Sr.APP submitted that since the court given finding that the accused is guilty of the offence, the accused is aged about 70 years and it shows his 20 CC.No.13793/2015 mental attitude towards the women who are coming to get education from him. The accused abused the victim and he is not entitled for leniency from the court. Hence prayed to sentence with maximum punishment.
The accused submitted that, he is aged about 75 years and is having age old wife. He has not been guilty of any offence in the past. He is having clean record and running tuition classes to the needy, poor students. Hence submitted to punish with lesser sentence.
Heard on sentence. There are no previous records of conviction or criminal background of accused. The victim was aged 18 years at the time of alleged offence and considering the nature of the offence the benefits of Sec. 3 and 4 of Probation of Offenders Act is not applicable. Looking at the facts and circumstances of the case and age of the accused, I pass following:- 21 CC.No.13793/2015
ORDER Acting U/s; 248(2) Cr.P.C. accused is hereby convicted for the offence punishable U/sec.354A of Indian Penal Code 1983.
The accused is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a fine Rs 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for two months in addition to the above mentioned imprisonment.
Bail bonds executed by the accused and that of surety shall stands cancelled.
The fine amount be given to the victim as compensation.
Office to supply free copy of the judgment to the accused immediately. (Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her and corrected by me, then pronounced in the open court, on this 13 th day of September, 2021) (Rajesh.N Hosamane) V ACMM, Bengaluru 22 CC.No.13793/2015 ANNEXURE
1. Witnesses examined by the prosecution .
P.W.1 - Shashikumar P.W.2 - Aishwarya P.W.3 - Mohan P.W.4 - Srividya P.W.5 - Mallikarjun P.W.6 - Ravikumar 2. List of the documents exhibited for the prosecution . Ex.P.1 Complaint Ex.P.1(a) Signature of PW.1 Ex.P.1(b) Signature of PW.5 Ex.P.2 Mahazar Ex.P.2(a) Signature of PW.1 Ex.P.2(b) Signature of PW.2 Ex.P3 FIR
3. List of the witnesses examined for defence .
DW.1 Ajay Rao
4. List of the Documents exhibited for defence .
Ex.D.1 PUC Marks Card of CW.4.
5. List of the MOs marked in the evidence.
-NIL-
(Rajesh.N Hosamane) V ACMM, Bangalore 23 CC.No.13793/2015 (Judgment pronounced in the open court vide separate order) ORDER Acting under section 248(2) of Cr.P.C. Accused is hereby convicted for the offence punishable under Section 354A of IPC.
V ACMM, Bangalore