Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

State By vs Shafiq Ahmed S/O.Khalid Ahmed on 10 July, 2015

        IN THE COURT OF THE X ADDL.C.M.M.
         MAYO HALL UNIT, AT BENGALURU

                   Dated: This the 10th day of July 2015

              PRESENT: Sri.ARJUN.S.MALLUR,
                                                     B.A.L., LL.B.,
                            X Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
                            Bengaluru City.

                       C.C.No.52894/2014
       Complainant -        State by, Police Sub Inspector
                            R.M.Nagar Police Station
                                       /vs/
       Accused        1.    Shafiq Ahmed S/o.Khalid Ahmed, 30
                            yrs. No.13/A, A Street, Halasur,
                            Bengaluru.
                      2.    Apalu S/o.Mehaboob Khan, 28 yrs.
                            No.8/1, B 5th Street, Halasur,
                            Bengaluru.
                      3.    T.K.Gajendran Reddy S/o.T.R.Kuppu-
                            swamy, 64 yrs.
                      4.    Harshavardhan S/o.T.K.Gajendran, 27
                            yrs.
                            Both      r/o.No.3B,    Ammanidhama
                            Apartment, No.24, Lakshmaiah Reddy
                            road, Halasur, Bengaluru.


                              JUDGMENT

1. The P.S.I of R.M.Nagar police station have filed this chargesheet against the accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offences punishable u/S.323, 384 r/w.511 IPC.

2 CC No.52894/2014

2. It is alleged by the prosecution that on 1/9/2012 between 11.00 AM to 9.50 PM at OMBR Layout, R.M.Nagar, Bengaluru the accused Nos.1 to 4 assaulted CW.1 voluntarily causing simple hurt to him and attempted to extort money from him payable to one Gajendra Reddy by putting him under fear of life asking to sign to the lease cancellation agreement and vacate the premises and thereby committed the alleged offences.

3. On the basis of the complaint filed by complainant, a case was registered in R.M.Nagar P.S., Cr.No.320/2012 and FIR was submitted to the court. Panchanama of scene of offence was conducted in presence of panchas and statement of witnesses were recorded. On completion of investigation chargesheet has been filed against the accused persons for the alleged offences.

4. Cognizance of offences was taken and summons was issued to the accused. Accused have appeared before the court through their counsel and have been released on bail. Copies of chargesheet were furnished to accused u/S.207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, charges were framed against the accused for the alleged offences and accused have pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

3 CC No.52894/2014

5. The prosecution in support of its case has examined 1 witness as PW.1 and got marked 2 documents as Exs.P1 and P2. As no incriminating evidence found against the accused his statement u/S.313 of Cr.P.C. was dispensed with.

6. Heard the arguments of Sr.APP appearing for the state and the counsel for accused and perused the records.

7. The points for consideration is:

1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on 1/9/2012 between 11.00 AM to 9.50 PM at OMBR Layout, R.M.Nagar, Bengaluru the accused Nos.1 to 4 assaulted CW.1 voluntarily causing simple hurt to him and attempted to extort money from him payable to one Gajendra Reddy by putting him under fear of life asking to sign to the lease cancellation agreement and vacate the premises and thereby committed the alleged offences?
2. What order?

8. My answer on the above points:

Point No.1 - Negative, Point No.2 - As per final order, for the following;
4 CC No.52894/2014
REASONS

9. POINT NO.1:

The prosecution in support of its case has examined 1 witness. PW.1 Anupam Dev is the complainant. He has turned hostile to the prosecution denying any assault on him by the accused.

He has also denied any extortion of money from him under threat of life by the accused. He has also denied his complaint before the police under Ex.P1 and also denied any mahazar drawn in his presence under Ex.P2. He has deposed having compromised the dispute with the accused. PW.1 being material witness having turned hostile and compromise being reported between parties, the prayer of learned Sr.APP to summon and examine other chargesheet witnesses was refused. In view of the material witness turning hostile and compromise being reported between parties, it cannot be said that prosecution has been able to prove the alleged offences beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, I answer Point No.1 in the Negative.

10. POINT NO.2:

For the afore said reasons, I pass the following;
5 CC No.52894/2014
ORDER U/s 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 and 2 are acquitted of the alleged offences punishable u/s.323, 385 of IPC. Bail bonds of accused stand cancelled and they are set at liberty. Property seized by the I.O. shall be destroyed as worthless after appeal period. (Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, same was corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 10th day of July 2015).
(ARJUN.S.MALLUR) X A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.

                             ANNEXURE
                  LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED
               Prosecution                 Defence
  PW.1 Anupam Dev.                          Nil
              Exhibits Marked
  Ex.P1 Complaint.
  Ex.P1(a)Signature of PW.1.
  Ex.P2 Mahazar.
  Ex.P2(a)Signature of PW.1.
          Material Objects got marked
                    -Nil-


                                           X A.C.M.M., Bengaluru.
 6   CC No.52894/2014