Bangalore District Court
By Mico Layout Police Station vs A-5 Hareesha @ Kunta on 31 March, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE CITY FAST TRACK,
(SESSIONS) JUDGE: BENGALURU CITY
(F.T.C.No.VII)
Dated this the 31st day of March 2015
-: PRESENT :-
SRI. N.P.KOPARDE B.A., LL. B.(Spl.)
PRESIDING OFFICER, F.T.C-VII,
SESSIONS CASE NO.285/2014
The State of Karnataka
Complainant: By MICO Layout Police Station,
Bengaluru.
Reptd. by Public Prosecutor,
City Civil Court Complex, Bengaluru.
V/s.
Accused: A-5 Hareesha @ Kunta
S/o Rajappa,
Aged about 25 years,
R/at No.1100, Near Bus stand,
Schedule caste Colony,
Devarachikkahalli,
Bengaluru
2 S.C.No.285/2014
1. Date of occurrence of 12.12.2012
offence
2. Date of report of 12.12.2012
offence
3. Accused No.1 to 4 12.12.2012
arrested on
Accused-5 arrested on 25.01.2013
4. Commencement of trial 24.12.2014
5. Closing of trial 23.03.2015
6. Name of the complainant Sri. Nanje Gowda,
PSI
7. First information report 13.12.2012
reached to the 8-45 p.m.
Magistrate
8. Offences complained of U/S. 399, 402 of
IPC
9. Opinion of the Judge Accused No. 5 is not
found guilty
10. Sentence or order Accused No. 5 is
acquitted as per the
Judgment
3 S.C.No.285/2014
J U D G M E N T
The Sub-Inspector of Police MICO Layout Police Station, filed charge sheet against the accused No. 5 for the offence punishable U/s. 399 and 402 R/W Sec. 34 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is as under
that :
On 12.12.2012 at about 9.50 p.m., when C.W.1 Nanje Gowda, PSI, MICO Layout was in Police Station he received a credible information that on the way to Bilekahalli near Ranka Apartment in open place 5 culprits holding deadly weapons in their hands making preparations for committing dacoity of public so he secured two panchas C.W.2 and C.W.3 and his staff C.W.4 to C.W.8 and took them in Government Vehicle near the spot of offence parked the vehicle and noticed that in the open site near Ranka Apartment, the accused No.1 to 5 holding deadly weapons like Machu and clubs talking each other for committing dacoity of public and to snatch away valuables from them. So all of them surrounded the accused and caught hold the 4 S.C.No.285/2014 accused No.1 to 4 and one of the accused i.e. accused No.5 ran away from the spot leaving the club in the spot of offence, then on search of accused they found accused No.1 was having Machu, accused No.2 having a club, accused No.3 having club, accused No.4 was having club. The C.W.1 conducted seizure panchanama in between 10.30 p.m. to 11.30 p.m. in the spot of offence and seized one Machu, three clubs and chilli powder pocket from the possession of the accused persons. Then the accused persons along with seized articles were brought to the Police station and produced before C.W.9, who registered a case against the accused in Crime No.624/2012 and after completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet to the Court.
3. On receipt of the charge sheet, the learned 6th ACMM, Bengaluru took cognizance of the offences cited therein and furnished prosecution papers to the accused No.1 to 5 per Section 207 of Cr.P.C. Since the offences punishable under Secs.399 and 402 R/W Sec. 34 of IPC are exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, committed the case U/Sec. 309 Cr.P.C. to the Hon'ble Principal City Civil 5 S.C.No.285/2014 and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, who in turn registered case against accused No.2, 3 and 5 in S.C. No.285/2014, since the said accused No.1 and 4 could not be secured by the police inspite of reissue of NBW against them, the case was registered against accused No.1 and 4 split of up by the committal court.
4. After securing the records from Hon'ble Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, the accused No.2 and 5 were enlarged on bail. Inspite of issue of NBW against accused No.2 and 3, the accused No.2 and 3 could not be secured by the Police so in order to have speedy trial, the case against the accused No.2 and 3 was split up.
5. After hearing the counsel for accused No.5, the learned Public Prosecutor for the State, the charge against the accused No.5 for the offence punishable U/Sec. 399 and 402 of IPC was framed, read over and explained to accused on 24.02.2014., the accused No.5 pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.
6 S.C.No.285/2014
6. The prosecution in order to prove its case, examined in all 2 witnesses as P.ws.1 and 2 out of 9 witnesses cited in the charge-sheet and through them got marked Ex.P.1 to P.3 and M.O.1 to 5. Inspite of sufficient opportunity given to the prosecution and concerned police failed to secure the presence of rest of witnesses, so the prayer of the prosecution to re-issue NBW to remaining witnesses was rejected and evidence of prosecution was taken as closed.
7. After closure of prosecution evidence, I examined accused U/Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C., so as to enable the accused No.5 to explain the circumstances appearing against him. Wherein the accused denied the incriminating evidence appearing against him and did not choose to lead any defence evidence on his behalf.
8. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and defence Counsel for the accused and perused the material placed on record.
7 S.C.No.285/2014
9. The following points arise for my consideration:
1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on 12.12.2014 at about 09.50 p.m., in the open site near Remka Apartment on the way to Bilekahalli within the jurisdiction of MICO Layout Police Station, the present accused No.5 along with split up accused No.1 to 4 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with its object of committing dacoity of public who would come there and making preparations for committing dacoity, holding deadly arms like Machu, clubs and chilli powder packet etc. in their hands and thereby the accused committed an offence punishable U/s.399, 402 of IPC?
2. What order?
10. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : Negative.
Point No.2 : As per final order, for the following :
R E A S O N S
11. Point No.1 : Out of 2 witnesses examined by the prosecution, P.W.1 - Ananda is one of the attesters of 8 S.C.No.285/2014 seizure panchanama P.W.2 - Jayaprakash P.C. No.9190 of MICO Layout Police Station who accompanied C.W.1 at the time of raid and panchanama.
12. P.W.1 - Ananda deposed in his evidence that about 3 years back when he had gone to the Police Station, the police obtained his signature, but they did not conduct any panchanama nor seized any articles. He further stated that he has not seen earlier M.O.1 to 5 namely one Machu, three clubs and chilli powder pocket. In the cross-examination by learned Public Prosecutor P.W.1 categorically denied the suggestion that on 12.12.2012, the Police called him and C.W.2 near BTM Layout 29th Main and then took them to lonely place on the way to Bilekahalli where the accused No.1 to 5 having deadly weapons in their hands making preparations to commit decoity. So the Police arrested accused No.1 to 4, but accused No.5 ran away from the spot. P.W.1 further denied that C.W.1 conducted panchanama in between 10.30 p.m. to 11.30 p.m. as per Ex.P.1 and seized M.O.1 to 5 from the possession of the accused and he gave statement before the police as per Ex.P.2 accordingly. 9 S.C.No.285/2014
13. P.W.2 - Jayaprakash H.C. No.9190 deposed in his evidence that on 12.12.2012 at about 10.00 p.m. when he was in the Police Station C.W.1 took him along with C.W.4, 5, 7 and 8 and two panchas C.W.2 and 3 in a Government Jeep to near S.N. Apartment, then C.W.1 directed him and P.C. No.8594 and panchas to ascertained that the accused talking each other in the spot of offence. Accordingly he went there and saw accused persons talking each other to rob the public. Accordingly, he intimated this fact to C.W.1 then all of them surrounded accused and apprehended 4 accused persons, accused No.5 ran away from the spot leaving club in the spot of offence. Then in between 10.30 p.m. to 11.30 p.m. C.W.1 conducted mahazar as per Ex.P.1 and seized M.O.1 to 5 from the possession of the accused. Thereafter, they brought 1 to 4 along with seized articles to the Police station where C.W.1 gave report as per Ex.P.3.
14. Since P.W.1 Pancha turned hostile to the prosecution and his evidence is in no way helpful to the prosecution. On perusal of the evidence of P.W.2 it appears 10 S.C.No.285/2014 that his evidence is in accordance with prosecution version but there are some discrepancies and infirmities in the evidence of P.W.2. As per the prosecution case, especially the complaint it appears that the panchas were secured in 29th Main on the way to the spot of offence but P.W.2 states that all staff members and panchas went in a Government Jeep from Police station itself, his evidence does not disclose that panchas were secured on the way to the spot of offence. In this case, another material witness i.e. seizure pancha C.W.2 has not cross-examined by the prosecution and the P.W.1 one of the seizure panchas turned hostile to the prosecution so recovery of incriminating articles from the possession of the accused persons is not proved by the prosecution. C.W.1, I.O. who conducted panchanama also not examined by the prosecution. So non examination of these material witnesses has proved fatal to the prosecution case. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that in absence of corroborative independent testimony of material witnesses, the sole evidence of P.W.2 who is police official, interested in securing the conviction of the accused is not safe to be relied upon. Therefore, I 11 S.C.No.285/2014 am constrained to hold that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. As such, I answer the point No.1 raised for my consideration in Negative.
15. Point No.2 : Having regard to my above observations and findings on point No.1 in negative, extending the benefit of doubt to the accused No. 5, I proceed to pass the following :
O R D E R Acting under Sec.235(1) Cr.P.c, I do hereby acquit the accused No. 5, for the offences punishable U/s. 399, 402 of IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond of the accused No. 5 stand cancelled.
The accused No. 5 is set at liberty.12 S.C.No.285/2014
M.Os.1 to 5 are ordered to be preserved for the trial of split up accused Nos.1 to 4.
.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by him, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 31st day of March, 2015).
(N.P.KOPARDE) Presiding Officer, FTC-VII, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURES LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION:-
PW.1 - Ananda S/o Gunashekar
PW.2 - Jayaprakash P.C.No.9190
MICO Layout P.S.
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE DEFENCE :-
- - - NIL - - -
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION :-
Ex.P.1 - Seizure Panchanama Ex.P.1(a) - Signature of P.W.1 Ex.P.2 - Statement of P.W.1 Ex.P.3 - Report/Complaint
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE:-
- - - NIL - - -13 S.C.No.285/2014
LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
M.O.1 - Machu M.O.2 - Club M.O.3 - Club M.O.4 - Club M.O.5 - Chilli powder pocket
LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE :- NIL Presiding Officer, FTC-VII, Bengaluru City.14 S.C.No.285/2014
Order pronounced in open Court vide detailed order passed separately.
O R D E R Acting under Sec.235(1) Cr.P.c, I do hereby acquit the accused No. 5, for the offences punishable U/s. 399, 402 of IPC. The bail bond and surety bond of the accused No. 5 stands cancelled.
The accused No. 5 is set at liberty.
M.Os.1 to 5 are ordered to be preserved for the trial of split up accused Nos.1 to 4.
(N.P.Koparde) P.O., F.T.C.No.VII, 15 S.C.No.285/2014