Bangalore District Court
State By vs A1 Rajendra @ Raju on 28 February, 2015
IN THE COURT OF FAST TRACK-II, BENGALURU CITY
Dated this the 28th day February, 2015
Present;- Sri. K.R. Nagaraja, B.A., L.L.B.
Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-II.
: SESSIONS CASE NO.258/2013 :
COMPLAINANT : State by:
Vyalikaval Police Station,
BENGALURU.
(By Sri. S.V.Bhat, Learned Public Prosecutor)
-V/S-
ACCUSED : A1 Rajendra @ Raju,
S/o R. Mani,
Aged about 22 years,
R/at No.100, 1st Main,
3rd Cross, Vyalikaval,
Bengaluru-03.
A2 Purushotham @ Purushi,
S/o R. Mani,
Aged about 20 years,
R/at No.100, 1st Main,
3rd Cross, Vyalikaval,
Bengaluru-03.
A3 Vinod @ Boosa,
S/o Murthy,
Aged about 22 years,
R/at No.29, 2nd Cross,
M.V. Block, P.G. Halli,
Bengaluru-03.
A4 Prakash,
S/o Shankar,
Aged about 21 years,
Judgment 2 S.C.258/2013
R/at U-65, 1st Main, 3rd Cross,
M.V. Block, P.G. Halli,
Bengaluru-03.
(By. Sri.Ramesh L.B. for A1 and A2, Sri.
C.N. Murthy for A3 & Sri. Vishwanath for
A4 Advocates).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Date of commission of offence : 30.03.2012
2. Date of report of occurrence : 30.03.2012
3. Date of commencement of evidence: 04.07.2014
4. Date of closing of evidence : 12.01.2015
5. Name of the
complainant : Sri. Devaraj.
6. Offence complained of : U/s 143, 148, 341,
307, 504, 506 r/w
Sec.149 of IPC
7. Opinion of the Judge : Charge not proved.
8. Order of sentence : Nil.
: JUDGMENT :
These accused have been facing instant trial for the offences punishable U/Sec. 143, 148, 341, 307, 504, 506 r/w Sec.149 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The case of prosecution at the nutshell is as follows:- Judgment 3 S.C.258/2013
PW.1 Devaraj lodged First Information Statement as per Ex.P1 on 30/3/2012 at 21.45 hours with CW.31 B.P. Nagaraju, PSI of complainant police station to the effect that he had advised A1 Rajendra and his younger brother Shashank near Tirumala School on two days prior to 30/3/2012 in connection with quarrel between younger brother of A1 and nephew of first informer Shashank who was studying at 9th standard at Tirumala School. First informer has further alleged that when he had been on 30/3/2012 at 5.30 p.m. near Tirumala School, after completion of tuition, friends of first informer namely Goutham, Naresh and Karl Marx who came through their bikes met first informer and at that time A1 and 2 wrongfully restrained first informer and picked up quarrel with first informer on the ground that first informer abused younger brother of A1 near his school and in continuation of quarrel A1 and 2, who suddenly picked up chopper and long from their car and assaulted first informer and gave criminal intimidation to his life and caused injury. PW.2 Goutham, PW.3 Karl Marx and Naresh came to the rescue of first informer. A1 to 3 and five boys on behalf of A1 also assaulted PW.2 and 3 and Naresh with their deadly weapons. First informer has further alleged that A1 inflicted injury on the right ear of Naresh with Judgment 4 S.C.258/2013 chopper and thereby he chopped ear with knife and A2 inflicted injury to PW.2 Goutham with chopper and A3 inflicted injury to PW.3 Karx Marx with chopper and five boys who were there at the spot at on behalf of A1 also threatened to murder PW.1 to 3 and thereafter PW.1 to 3 escaped from the spot through a two wheeler and admitted to Ramakrishna Nursing Home and thereafter they admitted to Vagus hospital. PW.1 with above allegation sought to take action against above noted accused and others. CW.31 based on above allegation of PW.1 registered crime for investigation and forwarded First Information Report. CW.31 PSI Nagaraju, did entire investigation and prepared charge sheet against these accused for the offences punishable U/Sec. 143, 148, 341, 307, 504, 506 r/w Sec.149 of Indian Penal Code alleging that these accused and absconded accused No.5 Arun and A6 Srikanth. CW.31 informed Hon'ble committal court that separate charge sheet will be placed against A5 and A6 who have been absconded. Hon'ble committal court after examination of charge sheet and its supporting materials took cognizance for the above noted offences against these accused. Consequently, C.C.No.24825/2012 was registered against these accused by Hon'ble committal court. Hon'ble committal court after having complied provision of Sec.200 Judgment 5 S.C.258/2013 of Criminal Procedure Code committed the case on hand U/Sec.309 of Criminal Procedure Code to the Hon'ble Prl. City Civil and Sessions Judge. Again case on hand has been assigned to this court for disposal in accordance with law.
3. All the accused who have been in jail are appeared through their counsel. This court by order dated 18/2/2014 found sufficient materials to frame charge against these accused. Charge for the above offences was framed. Contents of charge were read over and explained to the accused. All the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Prosecution able to examine 11 witnesses, who have been examined PW.1 to 11 and produced 15 documents which have been marked as Ex.P1 to P15. Learned public prosecutor prayed to issue further processes against CW.5, 6, 8, 9, 11 to 16, 20 and 31 for their examination before court. Police process personal returned processes issued against above witnesses on several occasion with a shara of want of time. Learned defence counsel pointed out examination of any of rest of the prosecution witnesses cited in the charge sheet would not serve any purpose as material witnesses Pw.1 to 3 have turned hostile to the version of prosecution. Processes issued against Judgment 6 S.C.258/2013 CW.3 another victim Naresh reported to be dead. PW.1 to 3 who are material witnesses and victim in the present case have denied all the alleged act of these accused and they turned hostile. When material and key witnesses that too inured have turned hostile, examination of any of the rest of the witnesses would not serve any purpose. Therefore, this court rejected prayer of learned public prosecutor and closed the evidence on behalf of prosecution. Since there were no incriminating evidence against accused, their examination U/Sec.313 of Criminal Procedure Code has been dispensed with.
4. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties.
5. Perused the papers.
6. In the light of above materials, following points fall for decision making of this court:-
1. Whether the prosecution proves with all beyond reasonable doubt that on 30/3/2012 at 5.30 p.m. at LPO Ground, near Water Tank, 3rd Cross, 2nd Main, M.V. Block, Gollarahatti, P.G. Halli, within the jurisdiction of complainant police station all the accused and absconded accused with common object to commit an offence Judgment 7 S.C.258/2013 against PW.1 and in furtherance of their common object, formed an unlawful assembly to commit offence against them and in prosecution of such assembly and common object, accused did rioting armed with deadly weapons and wrongfully restrained PW.1 Devaraja to proceed further and A1 chopped right ear of deceased CW.3 Naresh with long, A2 inflicted injury on the head of PW.2 Goutham with chopper and A3 also inflicted injury on the head of PW.3 Karl Marx with long with intend to kill them and thereby all the accused with common object to murder PW.1 to 3 and deceased Naresh attempted to murder of them and against A4 insulted PW.1 to 4 by abusing in filthy language and all the accused criminally intimidated to the life of Pw.1 to 4 and thereby all the accused committed offences punishable U/Sec. 143, 148, 341, 307, 504, 506 r/w Sec.149 of Indian Penal Code?
2. What order?
7. This court upon appreciation of available materials, give findings to the above points as follows:-
Point No.1 - Negative;
Point No.2 - As per final order,
for the following:-
: REASONS :
8. POINT NO.1:- Since all the accused have denied the above charge leveled against them, prosecution to place cogent and Judgment 8 S.C.258/2013 satisfactory evidence to bring above alleged guilt of accused with all beyond reasonable doubt. As noted supra, prosecution could examine 11 witnesses out of 13 witnesses cited in the charge sheet. 4 injured who are aggrieved persons are injured in the present case. One injured CW.3 Naresh reported to be dead. PW.1 to 3 namely Devaraj, Goutham and Karl Marx who are alleged to be injured from the alleged act of accused have categorically denied any of the alleged act of these accused against them. PW.1 to 3 have given cyclostyle evidence saying that all these accused did not assault them and did not make attempt to murder them and Naresh was died due to cancer disease. Thus all the injured have turned hostile to the prosecution case. PW.4 Bylanjaneya who said to be the panch witness to the mahazar also turned hostile. PW.5 Armugam who said to be the eye witnesses to the alleged act of accused also turned hostile. Pw.6 who is also said to be the eye witness to the incident also turned hostile. PW.7 Shivakumar who is also said to be eye witness to the alleged act of accused also turned hostile. PW.8 Ashoka also turned hostile to the version of prosecution. PW.9 Umesh P.C has given evidence on the arrest of A1 and 2 as per order of his superior. His evidence will not render any assistance to this court to bring home the alleged guilt of Judgment 9 S.C.258/2013 accused. PW.7 Shiva Kumar who is also said to be the another panch witness to the mahazar and PW.11 H.M. Muniraju who is also said to be the another panch witness to the seizure mahazar have turned hostile to the version of prosecution. Thus all the witnesses turned hostile to the version of prosecution. When the injured have turned hostile and have not attributed anything against accused on the alleged act, examination of any of the witnesses cited in the charge sheet, will not serve any purpose. Non-examination of rest of the prosecution witnesses is not fatal to the case of prosecution. Moreover, it appears that the injured and accused have been compromised. In the evidence of any of the above witnesses examined on behalf of prosecution nothing is elicited to believe the existence of above allegation of prosecution against accused. Thus prosecution miserably failed to prove this point with all beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, this point is answered in the negative.
9. POINT NO.3:- In the light of finding on above point, all these accused to be acquitted for the alleged offences. In the result, this court proceeds to pass the following:- Judgment 10 S.C.258/2013
ORDER In exercise of power vested with this court U/Sec.232 of Criminal Procedure Code, it is ordered that A1 to A4 are acquitted for the offence punishable U/Sec.143, 147, 148, 341, 307, 504, 506 r/w Sec.149 of Indian Penal Code.
A1 to A4 shall comply the provision of Sec.437-A of Criminal Procedure Code within a week from today.
Properties, which are the subject matter of the alleged crime, shall be preserved till end of the case, which will be filed against A5 and A6 as claimed by CW.31 Investigation Officer. (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript thereof is corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 28th day of February, 2015).
(K.R. NAGARAJA) Presiding Officer, F.T.C-II, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PROSECUTION PW1 Devaraja PW2 Goutham PW3 Karl Marx PW4 Bylanjaneya PW5 Armugam PW6 Srikanth PW7 Shivakumar PW8 Ashoka PW9 Umesh P.C. 10015 Judgment 11 S.C.258/2013 PW10 Amith PW11 H.M. Muniraju.
LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED FOR PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 Complaint
Ex.P.1(a) Signature of PW.1
Ex.P2 Spot mahazar
Ex.P2(a) Signature of PW.1
Ex.P3 Statement of PW.1
Ex.P4 Statement of PW.2
Ex.p5 Further statement of PW.2
Ex.P6 Statement of PW.3
Ex.P7 Further statement of PW.3
Ex.P8 Seizure mahazar
Ex.P8(a) Signature of PW.4
Ex.P9 Statement of PW.5
Ex.P10 Statement of PW.6
Ex.P11 Statement of PW.7
Ex.P12 Statement of PW.8
Ex.P13 Report of PW.9
Ex.P14 Seizure mahazar
Ex.P14(a) Signature of PW.10
Ex.P15 Seizure mahazar
Ex.P15(a) Signature of PW.11.
LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION:
-NIL-
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED & DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED FOR ACCUSED : Nil (K.R. NAGARAJA) Presiding Officer, FTC-II, Bangalore.