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 8, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

Is Shifting The Dead Body To The Freezer vs Person Pleaded Not Guilty And Claims To ... on 7 April, 2021

                                  1

                                                         C.C.No.1293/2019
  IN THE COURT OF THE XXXVII ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
             MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE CITY.

                  Dated this the 7th day of April, 2021.

              Present: Sri B.MOHAN BABU, B.A., L.L.B.,
                        XXXVII Addl. C.M.M., Bangalore.

                     C.C. No.1293/2019

              JUDGMENT UNDER SEC.355 OF CR.P.C.,
1. Complainant:                State by Yelahanka P.S.

2. Accused:                    Mahadeva S/o Renukappa,
                               Aged about 35 years,
                               R/o No.552, house of Munendra kumar,
                               Kogilu,Yelahanka, Bangalore­64.

3.Date of offence:             21­06­2018

4. Offences complained of:     U/s.341, 504, 323, 324, 506 of IPC.

5. Plea:                       Accused Pleaded not guilty.

6. Final Order:                Accused is Acquitted.

7. Date of Order:              07­04­2021.

                               *****

      The Police­Sub­Inspector, Yelahanka Police Station, Bangalore

has filed this charge sheet against the accused for the offence

punishable U/s.341, 504, 323, 324, 506 of IPC .
                                 2

                                                    C.C.No.1293/2019
     2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as follows:

     That on 21­06­2018 at about 7.00 p.m. in the evening accused

brought a dead body who had died in a accident, when the

complainant is shifting the dead body to the freezer, accused came

there and abused complainant in filthy language that he is not

responsible for that, and under the aforesaid circumstances on 22­06­

2018 near Kogilu cross, accused wrongfully restrained complainant

and assaulted to complainant with a wooden club and caused blood

injury and posed life threat to complainant with dire consequences.

Thereby the accused has committed the aforesaid offences.

     3. The accused was enlarged on bail. On receipt of charge sheet,

this court took the cognizance of the alleged offences and furnished

copy of the prosecution papers to the accused person. Charge for the

offence P/U/S.341, 504, 323, 324, 506 of IPC., was framed by my

predecessor in office, read over and explained to the accused. The

accused person pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.

     4. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, the prosecution

has examined only one witness as PW­1 and got marked two

documents at Ex.P1 and Ex.P2. Since there were no incriminating
                                  3

                                                     C.C.No.1293/2019
circumstances appeared against the accused, recording statement of

accused as required U/s.313 of Cr.P.C. is dispensed with and the

matter was posted for arguments.

     5. I have heard the arguments of learned Sr.APP., for the

prosecution and learned counsel for the accused. Perused the

materials available on record.

     6. In order to prove the guilty of accused, out of 07 witnesses,

the prosecution has examined CW­1 as PW­1. The PW­1 Basavaraj has

deposed that, he knows the accused. He further deposed that accused

did not abuse him and has not assaulted on him and he did not gave

life threat. He further deposed that on 21­06­2018 there was galata

between him and accused with respect to shifting of dead body, hence

they went to the police station but he has not lodged any complaint

against him. He identified Ex.P1 and he identified his signature as per

Ex.P1(a) and he another document at Ex.P2 and he identifies his

signature therein as per Ex.P2(a). He pleaded his ignorance about the

contents of Ex.P1 and P.2. At the request of learned Sr.APP., PW­1

was treated hostile and permission was accorded to cross examine
                                  4

                                                      C.C.No.1293/2019
him. The learned Sr.APP cross examined him but he denied all the

suggestion made to him and nothing worth has been elicited.

      7. On perusal of the evidence of PW­1, it goes to show that the

PW­1 has turned hostile to the prosecution case. The learned Sr.APP

sought to issue process against all the remaining witnesses but after

going through the testimony of PW­1, I do not find any incriminating

evidence against the accused with regard to the allegations made

against him. When the victim already turned hostile, no purpose

would be served even if remaining witnesses are examined. As such,

prayer was rejected to issue summons to Cws.2 to 7. Since there is no

incriminating evidence against the accused, hence the statement of

accused U/s.313 of Cr.P.C., is dispensed with. As said above, the

complainant as well as victim not supported the prosecution case so as

to prove the allegations against the accused. During the course of

cross examination he has admitted that matter has been resolved

between him and the accused. Though the accused is charged for the

offences punishable u/s.341, 504, 323, 324, 506 of IPC., for want of

evidence, the accused is entitled for acquittal. For the foregoing

discussion, I am of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove
                                           5

                                                                     C.C.No.1293/2019
the allegations against the accused                beyond all reasonable doubt.

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

                                        ORDER

Acting Under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/s.341, 504, 323, 324, 506 of IPC.

The bail bond of accused and surety shall stands cancelled.

(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on the computer and print out taken by her is verified, corrected & then pronounced by me in the Open Court dated this the 7th April, 2021) ( B.MOHAN BABU) XXXVII ADDL.C.M.M., BANGALORE. ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:

PW­1 : Basavaraj LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:

Ex.P.1         :      Complaint
Ex.P.1(a)      :      Signature of PW­1
Ex.P.2         :      Spot mahazar
Ex.P2a         :      Signature of PW­1.
                          6

                                         C.C.No.1293/2019

LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE PROSECUTION:

NIL LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE:
NIL LIST OF DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENCE .
NIL XXXVII ACMM., BANGALORE.
7
C.C.No.1293/2019 07­04­2021.
Judgment.
Judgment pronounced in the Open court (vide separately).
ORDER Acting Under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/s.341, 504, 323, 324, 506 of IPC.
The bail bond of accused and surety shall stands cancelled.
XXXVII ACMM.,B'lore.