Bangalore District Court
Bengaluru City vs Alleging That She Has Committed The ... on 24 August, 2022
1 C.C.No.18863/2021
KABC030533242021
Presented on : 09-08-2021
Registered on : 09-08-2021
Decided on : 24-08-2022
Duration : 1 years, 0 months, 15 days
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY
Dated this 24th day of August 2022
PRESENT : SRI.VEDAMOORTHY B.S. B.A.(L), LL.B.
II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City
JUDGMENT UNDER SECTION 355 OF Cr.P.C.
1.Sl. No. of the case C.C.No.18863/2021 Date of commission of the
2. 23.11.2020 offence (As per F.I.R.) Konanakunte Police Station,
3. Name of the complainant Bengaluru City.
2. Shivamma, W/o Venkatesh, R/at No.154, Rented
4. Name of the accused house of Shankarappa, Doddakallasandra, Bengaluru City.
The offences complained Sections 323, 325 and 504 of
5.
of the Indian Penal Code 2 C.C.No.18863/2021 6. Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty 7. Final order Accused No.2 is acquitted 8. Date of order 24.08.2022
The Police Sub-Inspector of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru has filed Police Report against the above named accused alleging that she has committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The Prosecution case in brief is that on 23.11.2020 at 3.30 p.m., when CW1 and CW2 were standing in front of the gate of House No.154, situated near BBMP Park of Doddakallasandra within the territorial jurisdiction of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru City talking each other, accused No.2 seeing it abused them in filthy languages. When CW1 and CW2 questioned the accused that why she is abusing them and what they did, accused No.2 assaulted CW2 by beating her chin with hands and voluntarily caused simple hurt to CW2; abused her in filthy languages; when CW1 questioned it and said that CW2 is like her daughter, her son scratched CW1; punched with his feast 3 C.C.No.18863/2021 and voluntarily caused grievous hurt by loosing two teeth. Thereby, accused No.2 has committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Based on the First Information of CW1, the crime was registered in Crime No.267/2020 at Konanakunte Police Station. During investigation, accused No.2 appeared before this Court and enlarged on bail. On completion of the investigation, the Police Sub-Inspector of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru City filed Police Report against accused No.2 alleging that she has committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. After taking cognizance of the said offences, the process was issued to accused No.2. She has appeared before this Court. The copies of the Police Report and other prosecution papers are furnished to accused No.2 under section 207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, since there were grounds for presuming that accused No.2 has committed offences triable by this court, charges for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 4 C.C.No.18863/2021 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code have been framed and read over to her in Kannada language. She has pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.
4. To prove the charges framed against accused No.2, the prosecution has produced the oral evidences of PW1 and PW2 and the documentary evidences in Ex.P1 to Ex.P3. Since, there were no incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidences of the prosecution witnesses against accused No.2, the examination of accused No.2 under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was dispensed with. Heard the arguments of learned Senior Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for accused No.2. Perused the materials available on record.
5. The points for determination are;
1. Whether prosecution has proved the offences charged against accused No.2 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code beyond reasonable doubt?
2. What order or sentence?
5 C.C.No.18863/2021
6. My answers to the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : In the Negative, Point No.2 : As per final order for the following;
REASONS
7. POINT No.1 :- In order to prove the charges leveled against accused No.2, out of 10 witnesses cited in the charge- sheet by the Investigation Officer, the prosecution has produced the oral evidences of only two witnesses before this Court as PW1 and PW2. PW1 Smt.Rathnamma is the first informant, injured and mahazar witness. PW2 Smt.Divya V. is also an injured witness in the alleged incident. The prosecution has also produced the documentary evidences Ex.P1 to Ex.P3. Among them, Ex.P1 is the First Information, Ex.P2 is the Mahazar and Ex.P3 is the Witness Statement of PW2.
8. As per the case of the prosecution, based on Ex.P1 given by PW1, the crime has been registered in Crime No.267/2020 and on investigation, since, there are evidences collected by the Investigation Officer to prosecute accused No.2 for the 6 C.C.No.18863/2021 offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, the charge-sheet was filed. In the First Information - Ex.P1, there are statements of PW1 with regard to the alleged incident committed by accused No.2. PW1 during her examination-in-chief has deposed the evidences contrary to the said facts. She has deposed in her examination-in-chief that no quarrel was taken place between her and accused No.2; since there was petty clashes between her and accused No.2, she gave complaint to the police; she does not know the contents of Ex.P1; the police have not conducted any mahazar at the place of incident in her presence as per Ex.P2 and nothing was seized at that time. She has deposed that she signed Ex.P2 at Police Station. She has been considered as hostile witness and cross-examined at the request of the prosecution. During cross-examination, she has denied the contents of Ex.P1; she gave it; the mahazar conducted at the place of incident in her presence as per Ex.P2 and seizer of two teeth. Nothing has been elicited in the cross-examination of PW1 supporting the case of the prosecution.
7 C.C.No.18863/2021
9. Another injured witness PW2 has deposed in her examination-in-chief that no quarrel taken place between her and accused No.2; she has not taken any treatment stating that she has sustained injuries as a result of the alleged incident; as there were some petty differences between them and accused No.2, PW1 gave complaint to Police and she has not given any statement to police. She has also been considered as hostile witness and cross-examined at the request of the prosecution. Nothing has been elicited in the cross-examination of PW2 supporting the case of the prosecution. She has also denied the incident as alleged. Her witness statement recorded by the Investigation Officer is marked as Ex.P3.
10. On perusal of the above evidences, it appears that the First Informant and the injured witnesses PW and PW2 have deposed not supporting the case of the prosecution. They have deposed in their cross-examination that they have compromised the matter with accused No.2 and they have received compensation of Rs.40,000/- from accused No.2. 8 C.C.No.18863/2021 Therefore, if the evidences of the other prosecution witnesses are recorded, no purpose will be served. For this reason, the evidences of the other prosecution witnesses are dropped. Under these circumstances, I am holding that the prosecution has not proved the guilt of accused No.2 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, I answer Point No.1 in the Negative.
11. POINT No.2 :- For the reasons stated in Point No.1, the prosecution has not proved the guilt of accused No.2 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, accused No.2 is not found guilty for the aforesaid offences charged against her. In the result, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDERS Under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C, accused No.2 is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
9 C.C.No.18863/2021
Her bail bond and surety bond executed under Section 436 of Cr.P.C. will be in force till completion of appeal period. Thereafter, it shall be stands canceled.
Since, the property seized in PF No.214/2020 is worthless, the same is ordered to destroy after appeal period. (Typed by me in the Court Computer, printout taken, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on 24.08.2022) (VEDAMOORTHY B.S.) II Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
ANNEXURE Witnesses Examined on behalf of Prosecution :-
PW1 : Smt.Rathnamma,
PW2 : Smt.Divya V.
Documents marked on behalf of Prosecution :-
Ex.P1 : First Information,
Ex.P1(a) : Signature,
Ex.P2 : Spot Mahazar,
Ex.P2(a) : Signature,
10 C.C.No.18863/2021
Ex.P3 : Witness Statement.
Material objects marked on behalf of Prosecution :-
NIL Witnesses Examined on behalf of the accused :-
NIL Documents marked on behalf of the accused :-
NIL (VEDAMOORTHY B.S.) II Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.11 C.C.No.18863/2021
24.08.2022 Judgment pronounced in open Court vide separate order.
ORDERS Under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C, accused No.2 is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
Her bail bond and surety bond executed under Section 436 of Cr.P.C. will be in force till completion of appeal period. Thereafter, it shall be stands canceled. 12 C.C.No.18863/2021 Since, the property seized in PF No.214/2020 is worthless, the same is ordered to destroy after appeal period.
(VEDAMOORTHY B.S.) II Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.