Bangalore District Court
The State Represented By vs A1: Sri.Suresh on 3 September, 2016
1 C.C.8138/2011
IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE
BENGALURU CITY
Dated this 3rd September 2016
Present: Sri.S.T.Devaraja, B.Sc.,LL.B.,
III Addl., Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
C.C.No:8138/2011
Complainant : The State represented by
Sub-Inspector of Police,
Kengeri Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(By Sri.APP, Bengaluru)
V/s
Accused : A1: Sri.Suresh,
S/o Sri.Muniyappa,
Aged about 29 yrs,
A2: Sri.Manja @ Manjunatha,
S/o.Sri.Gangappa,
Aged about 28 yrs,
2 C.C.8138/2011
A3: Sri.Basava @ Basavaraja,
S/o.Sri.Chandrappa,
Aged about 27 yrs,
A4: Sri.Mahesh,
S/o Sri.Chandrappa,
Aged about 27 yrs,
A1 to A4 R/at:Challeghatta
Village, Kumbalagodu Post,
Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru
South Taluk.Bengaluru Nagar.
(By Sri.TS Advs., Bengaluru)
---
JUDGEMENT U/Sec. 355 of Cr.P.C.
Case No. : C.C.No.8138/2011
Date of offence : 26/6/2010
Complainant : Smt.Lakshmamma
Accused : As named above
Offence : U/Sec.326 R/w 34 of IPC
Charge : Accused claimed to be tried
3 C.C.8138/2011
Final order : Acquitted
Date of order : 3/9/2016
The brief statement
and the Reasons for the
decision : As follows
---
JUDGEMENT
The P.S.I. of Kengeri Police have filed the chargesheet against the accused persons for the offence punishable U/Sec.326 r/w Sec.34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution is as follows:
It is the case of the prosecution that on 26/6/2010 at about 6-30 a.m. there was an quarrel between the accused persons and the CWs.4 to 7 in connection with financial transaction and at about 7-30 a.m. the CWs.4 to 7 made an attempt to escape from the hands of the accused persons and near Ganesha Temple the accused persons restrained 4 C.C.8138/2011 the CWs.4 and 5 and assaulted CW4 by making use of a chopper and also assaulted CW5 by making use of a Hockey Stick resulting in grievous injury. On the complaint of CW.1 by name Smt.Lakshmamma the Kengeri Police have registered a case in Crime No.200/2010 and after completion of investigation filed the chargesheet.
3. The accused persons appeared before the Court and engaged the services of a counsel. The charges framed by the learned predecessor and the accused persons claimed to be tried.
4. The prosecution has examined Pw.1 and relied upon the document as per Ex.P1. The 313 of Cr.P.C. statement is dispensed. No defence evidence adduced by the accused persons.
5. Heard, perused the entire case records.
6. The only point that arises for my consideration is:
1.Whether the prosecution has proved the case beyond all reasonable doubt for the offence punishable U/Sec.326 R/w Sec.34 of IPC? 5 C.C.8138/2011
2. What Order?
7. My findings on the above points are as hereunder:
Point No.1: In the Negative Point No.2: As per final order For the following:
::REASONS::
8. Point No.1: The prosecution has examined Smt.Lakshmamma as Pw.1. Inspite of identifying the signature as per Ex.P1(a) at Ex.P1 it is her contradictory evidence she do not know the case of the prosecution and the contents of Ex.P1 and Ex.P2. It is her contradictory evidence she has not witnesses the incident. In view of the nature of evidence the witness has been treated as hostile. Inspite of suggesting the contents of Ex.P1 as well as the case of the prosecution the same has been denied.
9. On consideration of the materials available on record the order sheet reveals ever since from the date of framing of charges and consequent to that repeatedly summons, 6 C.C.8138/2011 bailable warrant and NBW have been issued against the charge sheeted witnesses. Inspite of it the concerned investigation agency failed to secure any of the witnesses before the Court except CW1. The evidence of PW1 is not helpful to the case of the prosecution. Thereby, there is utter failure of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused persons. Consequently, resulting in failure to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt. Under the said circumstances, this Court has no option except to acquit the accused persons. Hence, I answer Point No.1 in the NEGATIVE.
10. Point No.2: In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
::ORDER::
Acting U/Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused persons are hereby ACQUITTED for the offence punishable U/sec.326 R/w sec.34 of IPC.7 C.C.8138/2011
The bail bond of the accused persons and that of the surety stand cancelled.
(Dictated to the stenographer on computer transcribed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in open Court on this the 3/9/2016).
(S.T.Devaraja), III Addl., Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
::ANNEXURE::
1. List of witnesses examined for the prosecution:
PW.1 : Smt.Lakshamamma
2. List of Documents on the side of the prosecution:
Ex.P1 : Complaint
Ex.P1(a) : Signature of PW.1
3. Material objects marked: Nil
4. Defence evidence: Nil
- --
III Addl., Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
8 C.C.8138/2011