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 Kp Agrahara P.S vs Persons For The Offence Punishable ... on 3 February, 2015

  IN THE COURT OF THE V ADDL. CMM., AT BANGALORE.
     Dated this the Tuesday the 3rd day of February 2015
         Present:      Sri B. Venkatesha, B.Sc., LL.B.,
                        V Addl., C.M.M Bangalore.

                     CC No.20969/2005

Complainant                    State by KP Agrahara P.S., Bangalore.

                               (Rep., by Sr. APP., B'lore)

                               V/s.

                               1.Nirmala, Dead, Case abated

                               2.Smt. Shamala D/o Late Govindaraj,
                               45 Yrs.,

                               3.Smt. Rathna D/o Late Govindaraj,
                               40 Yrs.,

                               All are R/a No.25/C, 9th Cross, Magadi
                               Road, Bangalore-23 and

                               also at No.69, 3d Block, 3rd Cross,
                               Vishwapriyanagar, Begur, Bangalore-68.

                               (Rep by Sri VV and KN, Adv.,)

              JUDGMENT AS PER SEC.355 Cr.P.C.,

1. Serial Number of the case          :    CC No.20969/2005

2. Date of the commission of the
   offence                       :         In the year 2001

3. The name of the complainant        :    Sri Sathyanarayana
                                 2               CC No.20969/2005

4. Name of the accused persons
  and their parentage and residence:     As stated above.

5.the offence complained off        :    U/s.420 r/w Sec.34 of IPC
  and proved

6.The plea of the accused and       : Pleaded not guilty and denied
  their examination                   the incriminating evidence.

7.The final order                   :    Acquitted

8.The date of such order            :    03.02.2015.


          THE BRIEF REASONS FOR FINAL ORDER:

     The prosecution's case in brief as set out in Cl. No.7 of

charge sheet is that about three years prior to the filing of

complaint the accused persons were running share benefit

scheme business under the name and style Rego Enterprises

at No.25/C, situated at 9th Cross, Magadi Road, a place that lies

within the limits of KP Agrahara P.S., Bangalore, by collecting

share amount of Rs.100/- each per month from the complainant-

Sathyanarayana, CW.2 to 7, and others under the pretext that

after lapse of 36 months they will pay Rs.5,000/-each to them

along with interest. But, after maturity the accused persons have

failed to return the said amount and cheated them for an amount
                                3              CC No.20969/2005

of Rs.1,02,000/-. Thus, the accused persons have committed the

aforesaid offences as alleged. Hence, the Charge Sheet.

     2.During crime stage, the accused No.1 to 3 appeared

before this Court through their counsel and that they were

enlarged on regular bail. After submission of this charge sheet,

this court has taken cognizance of the aforesaid offence against

the aforesaid accused No.1 to 3. Copies of the charge sheet have

been furnished to the other accused as per Sec. 207 of Cr.P.C.

With no objection from the Counsel for the other accused, this

Court framed charge for the aforesaid offences against them.

The same read over and explained to them in the language

known to them. They pleaded not guilty. The prosecution has

examined complainant, CW.2 to 8 as PWs.1 to 6, 8 and 7 and it

has got marked nine documents as Ex.P1 to P9. During the

course of trial, it was reported that A-1 was dead, hence, this

case as against A-1 is taken as abated. The trial was taken up

against accused No.2 and 3 only. Statement of the accused as

required U/sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded. The accuseds
                                 4              CC No.20969/2005

have denied the incriminating evidence that appeared against

them. They submitted that they have no defence evidence.

     3.Heard the arguments of both sides, perused evidence

placed before the court.

     4.This case has been registered in view of the complaint

submitted as per Ex.P-9/P-1 that filed U/s.200 of Cr.P.C., before

this Court by the complainant-Sathyanarayana.           The said

complaint has been referred to the then SHO of KP Agrahara P.S.,

Bangalore for investigation. The I.O., of KP Agrahara P.S., has

inquired the matter and submitted the charge sheet against the

accused persons for the offence punishable U/s.420 of IPC on the

ground that prima facie it was proved that the accused persons

have cheated CW.1 to 7 and others as alleged in the complaint

marked as Ex.P-9 and P-1.           Ex.P-2 Discloses that Rego

Enterprises issued the same in favour of the complainant by A-1 G

Nirmala r/a No.69, 3rd Block, 4th Cross, Vishwapriyanagara, Begur,

Bangalore-68 and its Branch office at No.25/C, 9th Cross, Magadi

Road, Bangalore. Ex.P-2 discloses that from January 1999 to till
                                 5              CC No.20969/2005

October 2001 amount of Rs.100/- per month has been collected.

Ex.P-3 similar card issued in the name of CW.2-PW.2 Jyothi of this

case alleged to issued by accused No.1. The same also discloses

that Rs.100/- per month from January 1999 to December 2001

have been collected.     Ex.P3 similar card issued CW.4/PW.4

Sudhakar. The same also discloses that from January 1999 to

October 2001 Rs.100/- per month have been collected for Rego

Enterprises. Ex.P-5 similar card issued in the name of CW.5/PW.5

Smt. Meena. The same also discloses that from January 1999 to

September 2001 Rs.100/- per month have been collected. Ex.P-6

similar card issued to one Ramkumar, the same also discloses

that from January 1999 to December 2001 Rs.100/- per month

has been collected for Rego Enterprises.      Ex.P-7 similar card

issued to one Babu that discloses that Rs.100/- per month from

January 1999 to October 2001 have been collected. Ex.P-8 is the

FIR submitted to this Court.    Ex.P-1 is the original of Ex.P-9.

5.PWs.1 to 6 and 8 during the course of their oral evidence that

recorded during the course of their respective chief-examination
                                 6              CC No.20969/2005

have specifically deposed before this Court that the accused by

saying that they have running chit fund business, and if they all

paid Rs.100/- per month for about 3 years, they will pay an

amount of Rs.5,000/- and induced them to become members of

the said business and collected an amount of Rs.100/- per month

from them. They have further deposed that in spite of maturity

the accused have not paid the amount to them. They have stated

that Ex.P2 to P7 are the membership cards that issued to them by

the accused persons, and in that the accused persons have put

their initials on every month on Ex.P2 to 7 in respect of receiving

an amount of Rs.100/- each per month from them. They have

specifically deposed that the accused persons have cheated to

them without returning the amount.

     6. In this case the prosecution has not collected any

documentary evidence to show that the accused persons have

been running chit fund business under name and style as Rego

Enteriprises, in the address as mentioned in the documents

marked as per Ex.P-2 to P-7.     PW.7 has deposed that he has
                                 7              CC No.20969/2005

received the complaint as per Ex.P-9 a copy of Ex.P1 and has

registered this case and submitted FIR to this Court as per Ex.P-8.

He has deposed that he received Ex.P2 to P7 share benefit

scheme cards from CW.1 to 5 and 7. He has stated from the

investigation it was proved that the accused persons have

committed the offence as alleged. Therefore, he has submitted

charge sheet against the accused persons.

     6.According to the evidence of PW.1 to 6 and PW.8, and as

per the contents of Ex.P-2 to P7 the alleged share benefit scheme

business has been closed in the month of December 2001, but

the complaint was lodged on 2.9.2004. This itself discloses that

there is a delay of more than 3 years from the last month of

alleged share benefit scheme business. Why the complaint has

been lodged after lapse of three years from the last month of the

said share benefit scheme business has not been properly

explained either in the complaint or in the evidence of PW.1 to 6

and 8. No proper reasons also not mentioned or deposed that

what is prevented them to file complaint as early as possible after
                                  8              CC No.20969/2005

closure of the last month of share benefit scheme business. The

evidence of PW.1 also discloses that he and his son are the

tenants of the accused-Shamala. There is a civil dispute between

him and accused-Shamala in respect of occupation of the said

house.   The same discloses that there is ill will between the

complainant and the accused-Shamala.       No evidence placed to

believe that the accused No.2 to 3 are the partners of Rego

Enterprises and that the accused No.1 to 3 have collected the

amount from the aforesaid witnesses, as alleged. The said

documents marked as per Ex.P2 to P7 didn't disclose that the

accused persons No 2 and 3 have issued the said cards to the

said witnesses. The said document also doesn't disclose that the

accused persons No 2 and 3 have collected the amount as

mentioned in the documents marked as per Ex.P2 to P7.

     7. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the evidence of PW.1

to 6 and 8 is doubtful in nature and it is very difficult to rely on

the said evidence to believe that the accused persons have

committed the aforesaid offences as alleged.      Further delay of
                                  9              CC No.20969/2005

more than three years in lodging of this complaint by the

complainant leads to draw an adverse inference and it leads to

disbelieve the evidence of PW.1 to 6 and 8. The same is fatal to

the case of the prosecution. The accused persons are entitled to

the benefit of doubt.     Therefore, I am of the opinion that the

prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case as alleged

against the accused persons beyond all reasonable doubt. The

accused persons are entitled to be acquitted.

     7.In view of the aforesaid discussion, this court proceed to

pass the following:-

                              ORDER

By acting under section 248(1) Cr.P.C. the aforesaid accused No.2 and 3 are hereby acquitted of the offence punishable U/s.420 r/w Sec.34 of IPC.

They shall be set at liberty forthwith if they are not required to other cases. However, their bail and surety bonds are hereby extended for a period of 6 months from this date in view of Secs.437(A) of Cr.P.C., 10 CC No.20969/2005 Refund cash security amount of Rs.2,000/- each to accused No.2 and 3 after expiry of appeal period.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript thereof is computerized and print out taken by him is verified and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the Tuesday the 3rd day of February 2015.) (B.VENKATESHA) V Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.

ANNEXURE

1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION PW.1 Sathyanarayana PW.2 Jyothi PW.3 Kumar PW.4 Sudhakar PW.5 Meena PW.6 Prabhu PW.7 L Nagaraju PW.8 Babu.

2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex-P-1 Complaint dt., 2.9.2004 Ex.P-2 to 7 Share Benefit Scheme Cards Ex.P-8 FIR Ex.P-9 Copy of complaint dt., 2.9.2004.

3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE:

NIL

4. LIST OF THE MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:

NIL (B.VENKATESHA) V Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
11 CC No.20969/2005
03.02.2015 Case called. Accused No 2 and 3 are pt., /abt., State by Sr. APP Accused No.1 abated Accused No.2 and 3 on bail For Judgment Judgment pronounced in the open Court as under vide separate Judgement kept in the file.

By acting under section 248(1) Cr.P.C. the aforesaid accused No.2 and 3 are hereby acquitted of the offence punishable U/s.420 of IPC.

They shall be set at liberty forthwith if they are not required to other cases. However, their bail and surety bonds are hereby extended for a period of 6 months from this date in view of Secs.437(A) of Cr.P.C., Refund cash security amount of Rs.2,000/- each to accused No.2 and 3 after expiry of appeal period.

(B.VENKATESHA) V Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.

12 CC No.20969/2005