Bangalore District Court
State Of Karnataka vs Hari Vijay Raj on 9 July, 2020
IN THE COURT OF THE LIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
& SESSIONS SPECIAL JUDGE
BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9th DAY OF JULY 2020
PRESENT
S.H. PUSHPANJALI DEVI, B.A., LL.B.,
LIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Special Judge,
Bengaluru.
S. C. No. 55/2016
COMPLAINANT : State of Karnataka
By Yeshwanthapura Police Station,
Bangalore.
[Rep. by Public Prosecutor]
/ VERSUS /
ACCUSED : Hari Vijay Raj
S/o Thangaraj,
Aged about 30 years,
R/at No. 33-1, 3rd Main Road,
Matadahalli,
R.T. Nagara,
Bengaluru.
[Rep. by Mr. SM/HP - Advocates]
2
SC. No. 55/2016
TABULATION OF EVENTS
1. Date of commission of : 05-07-2015
Offence
2. Date of Report of Offence :
23-09-2015
3. Date of arrest of Accused : 25-09-2015
4. Date of release of Accused : 16-12-2015
on Bail
5. Period undergone in : 81 days
Judicial Custody
6. Name of the Complainant : Prosecutrix
7. Date of Commencement of
recording evidence : 19-11-2019
8. Date of closing of Evidence : 13-02-2020
9. Charge framed of : Sections 376 and 417
of IPC
10. Opinion of the Judge : As per final order
(S.H. PUSHPANJALI DEVI)
LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special
Judge, Bangalore.
3
SC. No. 55/2016
JUDGMENT
This Charge Sheet is filed by the Inspector of Police, Yeshwanthapura Police Station, Bengaluru City against the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The brief facts of the case of the Prosecution are that, CW1, the Prosecutrix and the Accused were classmates from 8th standard and loving each other. The Accused was sending Whats App messages, as he loving her and both of them were roaming around together and informed her parents about their love. On 5/7/2015, the Grand father of CW-5 was dead and the Accused came to the house No.75/E, 3 rd line, Railway quarters, Yeshwanthapura, when CW-1 was alone in the house and forcible had committed Rape against her consent, afterwards refused to marry and cheated her.
4
SC. No. 55/2016
3. Therefore, the Prosecutrix gave complaint to the Yeshwanthapura Police Station on 23/9/2015, received by CW18, the Police Inspector and registered the case in Crime No. 515/2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 420 of IPC. Afterwards, he has forwarded the FIR and Complaint to the concerned Magistrate through PC 5726, Lakshmipathi G.H.
4. Subsequently, on 25/9/2015, CW18 has deputed Cws 16 and 17 in search of the Accused. After they collected the information about the Accused from the informants as he is available in his house, went to the house of Accused bearing No.33/1, Matadahalli, R.T. Nagar, Bangalore and found him in his house. After enquiring his name and address, got confirmation as he is the person required in the present crime, brought to the Police Station and produced before the Investigating Officer with a report of CW 16.
5
SC. No. 55/2016
5. Afterwards, the Investigating Officer has followed the procedure of arrest of accused and recorded his Voluntary Statement. On the same day, that is, on 25-09-2015, the Accused was sent with HC 4709 to M.S. Ramaiah Medical College & Hospital, for medical treatment and he was examined by the CW.11, Dr. Jayanth.
6. Thereafter, on 26-09-2015 the Accused was produced before the concerned Magistrate and remanded to Judicial Custody. Afterwards, he was represented through the counsel and granted regular bail in Crl. Mis. No. 7856/2015 dated 16/12/2015 and released on 17-12-2015 after furnishing sureties.
7. The Investigating Officer during investigation on 24-09-2015 sent the Prosecutrix along with WPC-CW.12, for medical examination to the M.S. Ramaiah Medical College, Bangalore. On 01-10-2015, on the requisition of the Investigation Officer, the 6 SC. No. 55/2016 Statement of Prosecutrix under Section 164 of Cr. P.C. has been recorded by the XIII A.C.M.M. Bangalore.
8. The Investigating Officer after completed the investigation has filed the Charge Sheet against the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of I.P.C. The Trial Court has taken Cognizance of the said offences and case was registered in C.C. 28134/2015. The copies of the Charge Sheet were furnished to the Accused and on 28-12-2015 committed the case to the Principal City Civil and Sessions Court, Bangalore, in compliance of Section 209 Cr.P.C.
9. Subsequent to receiving the Committal Records, the case has registered in S.C. No. 55/2016 and made over to this Court for disposal in accordance with law.
10. This Court after summoning the Accused, he was represented through the Counsel. Afterwards 7 SC. No. 55/2016 he was granted on regular bail as already enlarged on bail in Crl. Mis. No. 7856/2015 dated 16/12/2015. After hearing the arguments of both the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Counsel for Accused, as prima-facie materials found against him, proceeded under Section 228 of Cr. P.C., and framed Charge against the Accused for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of IPC. The same was read over and explained to him, he has not pleaded guilty and claims to be tried.
11. The Prosecution has examined 4 witnesses, out of 18 witnesses, as PWs 1 to 4. The documents are marked as Ex.P1 to 8, P-1(a), P-2(a), P-3(a), P-4(a), P- 6(a). The witnesses CWs 2 to 4, 7 and 8 remained absent in spite of issuance of Proclamation. Thereafter, the learned Public Prosecutor has closed the evidence of Prosecution.
12. This Court has not found any Incriminating Circumstances against the Accused, as 8 SC. No. 55/2016 the Complainant herself is turned hostile. Other witnesses also not deposed anything against him. Therefore, the Statement of Accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. is dispensed with.
13. Heard, the arguments of learned Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned Counsel appearing for the Accused.
14. The points that arise for my consideration are :
1. Whether the prosecution has proved that the Accused on 05-07-2015 when the Prosecutrix was alone at her house No.75/E, in the Railway Quarters at Yeshwanthapura, induced, promised to marry and forcible committed Rape on her ?
2. Whether the Prosecution has proved that the Accused has refused to marry the Prosecutrix and cheated her?
3. Whether the prosecution has proved that the Accused has committed the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of I.P.C?
4. What Order?9
SC. No. 55/2016
15. My findings on the above points are:-
Point No. 1 : In the Negative
Point No. 2 : In the Negative
Point No. 3 : In the Negative
Point No. 4 : As per final order
for the following.
REASONS
16. Point Nos.1 & 2: These points are taken together for common discussion to avoid the repetition.
17. The allegations made by the Prosecution against the Accused is the Rape committed on her, thereafter refused to marry. Therefore, case has been registered for the offences of Rape and cheating.
18. In order to prove the said allegations, the Prosecution is examined the Prosecutrix as PW.1. She has identified the Accused in the open Court and the complaint given as per Ex.P1, her signature is marked as Ex.P-1(a). She has also identified Spot 10 SC. No. 55/2016 Mahazar conducted as per Ex.P-2 and her signature as Ex.P-2(a). The Statement given before Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C., is identified and marked as Ex.P-3 and her signature as Ex.P-3(a). The Medical Certificate Ex.P4 bears her signature, which is marked as Ex.P-4(a). However, she shown ignorance about the contents of documents Exs.P-1 to 4, therefore treated as hostile.
19. In the Cross-examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, the contents of Complaint Ex.P-1 read over to her, but she has denied the same and not admitted the allegations made against accused in the said complaint. The Mahazar conducted by the Police on 24-09-2015 in the Yeshwanthapura Railway Quarters No.75-E as per Ex.P-2 and she put signature to the said Mahazar at the spot is not admitted. The Statement recorded by the concerned Magistrate as per Ex.P-3 and the signature put to Medical Certificate Ex.P-4, when she was examined by the Medical Officer 11 SC. No. 55/2016 are not admitted. She has also denied the Further Statement given against the Accused as per Ex.P-5 alleging that the Accused after forcible having Sexual Intercourse on the promise to marry, later refused to marry her, therefore, attempted to commit suicide by drinking bed-bug poison and she was admitted in the K.C. General Hospital.
20. However the evidence of Prosecutrix is totally contradictory to the complaint, Statements and Further Statement given with regard to alleged Rape and Cheating committed by the Accused.
21. The mother of the Prosecutrix Smt. Saroja is examined as Pw.3. Though she has admitted the relationship with the Prosecutrix as daughter, not identified the Accused and also denied the statement given against him. Therefore, she is treated hostile and cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor. 12
SC. No. 55/2016
22. In the Cross-examination, she is not admitted the contents of her statement given before the police as per Ex.P7 stating that the Accused in the year 2012 after approaching her expressed his intention to marry the Prosecutrix, on the ground that he was loving her, thereafter committed Rape and refused to marry, cheated and married another girl.
23. The brother of the Prosecutrix Mr. Karthik is examined as Pw.4, who is also deposed similarly as his mother by showing ignorance about the Accused. He has also not admitted statement given against the Accused as per Ex.P8 stating that, the Accused during 2012 came to his house and expressed his intention to marry the Prosecutrix, committed Rape on her and cheated by marrying another girl.
24. The Prosecution has produced the medical evidence by examining Dr. Mohan B.R. as Pw.2. According to him, on 21-09-2015, the Prosecutrix was brought to K.C. General Hospital, for treatment as she 13 SC. No. 55/2016 had consumed bed-bug poison along with her brother Karthik. After examining her he gave Medical Certificate as marked as Ex.P6 and his signature is marked as Ex.P6(a). He has further stated that the Prosecutrix was admitted as inpatient on the same day and discharged on 22-09-2015, who was treated only for consuming bed-bug poison.
25. The evidence of Prosecutrix is not corroborated with the documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P5, including the complaint, in which she has alleged about the Accused and she was in love, afterwards both of them decided to marry. The Accused on the promise to marry has forcible committed Rape, thereafter, refused to marry and cheated her by marrying another girl. The evidence of mother and brother of Prosecutrix is also not corroborated, as both of them shown ignorance about the Accused and also approach made by him after visiting their house to marry the Prosecutrix, committed Rape and cheated her. 14
SC. No. 55/2016
26. The Prosecution though has examined the Medical Officer, who had examined the Prosecutrix and the Medical Certificate given as per Ex.P6, it will not be considered in proof of the alleged Rape committed by the Accused on the Prosecutrix. Because the Medical Officer Pw.2 has given Medical Certificate after giving treatment when she was brought to K.C. General Hospital on 21-09-2015, for consuming bed-bug poison.
27. Therefore, considering the entire evidence of Prosecution witnesses, which is not corroborated in proof of allegations of Rape and cheating, I come to conclusion that the Prosecution on 05-07-2015 when the Prosecutrix was alone at home in the Railway Quarters of Yeshwanthapura, he had forcible committed Rape, cheated by way of refusing to marry and married another girl. Hence, I answer point Nos.1 & 2 in the Negative.
15
SC. No. 55/2016
28. Point No. 3: The Prosecution has not proved the Rape committed by the Accused on the Prosecutrix as per the allegations made against him in the Complaint and also Further Statement. The important proof for alleged Rape and cheating as required under Sections 376 and 417 IPC is lacking in the evidence of the Prosecution witnesses. Further the investigation conducted by the Investigation Officer is not supported by his oral evidence. The doctor, who has examined the Prosecutrix is also not examined before the Court. The spot Mahazar Ex.P2 is not proved by examining Panchas. Therefore either the Spot Mahazar or Medical Report of Prosecutrix are not supported by any oral evidence of respective Panchas and Doctor. Because, after filing the Complaint, the Prosecutrix said to be subjected for medical examination in M.S. Ramaiah Hospital, who was treated by Cw.10 Dr. Jasmine Abraham, but the said doctor is not examined before the Court. 16
SC. No. 55/2016
29. Therefore, in the absence of relevant proof of Rape and Cheating, I am of the opinion that the Prosecution has failed to prove the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of IPC alleged to be committed by the Accused on the Prosecutrix and I answer point No.3 in the Negative.
30. Point No. 4: In view of my above discussion, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. Accused Hari Vijay Raj S/o Thangaraj, is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of I.P.C.
The Bail bonds executed earlier by the Accused and Surety shall stands cancelled.17
SC. No. 55/2016 The properties if any, seized by the Investigating Officer in this case, are ordered to be destroyed as worthless and useless after the completion of Appeal period.
(Dictated to the Judgment writer, transcript and computerized by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court today on 9th day of July, 2020.) (S.H. PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Special Judge, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE
1) List of witnesses examined for the Prosecution PW.1 Victim PW.2 Dr. Mohan B.R. PW.3 Saroja PW.4 Karthik
2) List of documents marked for the Prosecution Ex.P1 Complaint Ex.P1(a) Signature of PW-1 18 SC. No. 55/2016 Ex.P2 Spot Mahazar Ex.P2(a) Signature of PW-1 Ex.P3 164 of Cr.P.C. Statement of Victim Ex.P3(a) Signature of PW-1 Ex.P4 Medical Certificate of Victim Ex.P4(a) Signature of PW-1 Ex.P5 Further Statement of Victim Ex.P6 Medical Certificate of Victim Ex.P6(a) Signature of PW-2 Ex.P7 Statement of PW-3 Ex.P8 Statement of PW-4.
3) List of Material Objects marked for the Prosecution;
- NIL -
4) List of witnesses examined for the Accused;
- NIL -
5) List of documents marked for the Accused;
- NIL -
19
SC. No. 55/2016
6) List of Material Objects marked for the Accused;
- NIL -
(S.H. PUSHPANJALI DEVI) LIII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore.