Bangalore District Court
The State Of Karnataka Through vs Bylamma (Abated) on 11 October, 2022
1 CC.No.12902/13
KABC030511702013
IN THE COURT OF XXIV ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF OCTOBER 2022
C.C. No.12902/13
Present: SRI. B.C.CHANDRASHEKAR
B.A., LL.B.,
XXIV ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
COMPLAINANT : The State of Karnataka through
Vijayanagar Police Station
Rep.by Sr.APP
V/s.
Accused 1. Bylamma (Abated)
2. K.Yogesh, s/o.Kumbi Narasappa,
43 yrs, R/at.No.299, 2nd main, 7th
cross, Panchasheelanagar,
Mudalapalya, Vijayanagar,
Bengaluru.
Rep.by Sri.CS, Advocate
2 CC.No.12902/13
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT : ---
OF OFFENCE
DATE OF ARREST OF THE : Accused No.2 is on bail.
ACCUSED
OFFENCES ALLEGED : U/s.419, 467, 468, 471, 420, 511,
506, 341 r/w.34 of IPC.
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT : 29/09/2022
OF EVIDENCE
DATE OF CLOSING OF : 29/09/2022
EVIDENCE
OPINION OF THE JUDGE : Found not guilty
(B.C.CHANDRASHEKAR)
XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
: J U D G M E N T :
The PSI of Vijayanagar Police station has filed
chargesheet against accused persons for the offences
punishable u/s.419, 467, 468, 471, 420, 511, 506, 341
r/w.34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are
that the CW 1 and 2 are the owners and possesses of site
No.68/A and 87/A out of R.S.No.52 of
Annapoorneshwarinagar, Mudalapalya, Bengaluru and the
accused persons with common intention and in order to cheat
CW 1 and 2 have created agreement of sale on 13/12/1989
3 CC.No.12902/13
and GPA on 16/2/1990 and affidavits as if executed by
G.Kempaiah in favour of accused no.1 Bylamma, even though
he died on 21/5/1988 and filed objection before the BBMP
not to make B Khatha in the name of CW 1 and also forged
the signature of G.Kempaiah. Further on 17/2/13 at 10.30
am., in site No.68/A, the accused persons abused the CW 1 in
filthy language, wrongfully restrained him from entering into
the site and gave life threat and thereby committed the
offences u/s.419, 467, 468, 471, 420, 511, 506, 341 r/w.34
of IPC.
3. On the basis of the complaint of the CW 1, this crime
has been registered by Vijayanagar Police Station. During
the crime stage, the accused No.2 has arrested and produced
before the court and through his counsel, accused no.2 filed
the bail application. Accordingly, he has released on bail.
Likewise, the accused No.1 has voluntarily surrendered before
the court through her counsel and filed the bail application.
Accordingly, she has also released on bail. After investigation,
Investigating officer has submitted the chargesheet. The
cognizance for the said offences is taken.
4. At this juncture, accused no.1 was reported as dead,
hence, case against accused no.1 is ordered to be Abated vide
orders dtd: 26/5/14. The copies of the prosecution papers
4 CC.No.12902/13
have furnished to the accused No.2 as contemplated u/s.207
of Cr.P.C., After being heard the arguments before charge, as
there were no grounds to discharge him, charge for the
offences u/s.419, 467, 468, 471, 420, 511, 506, 341 r/w.34
of IPC have been framed & read over, explained to the
accused no.2 in the language best known to him. The
accused no.2 has not pleaded guilty and claims to be tried.
Hence, the case taken up for trial.
5. In order to prove the guilt of the accused person, the
prosecution has examined the complainant as PW 1 out of
13 witnesses as cited in the chargesheet. 2 documents have
been marked as Ex.P.1 & 2. Since the PW 1 being the
victim/complainant has turned hostile and there is no
incriminating evidence against the accused, examination of
accused u/s.313 of Cr.P.C., has been dispensed with.
6. Heard the arguments of learned APP and counsel for
accused. Perused.
7. On the basis of the above, the following points have
arises for my consideration :
1) Whether prosecution proves beyond
reasonable doubt that the CW 1 and 2
are the owners and possesses of site
No.68/A and 87/A out of R.S.No.52 of
5 CC.No.12902/13
Annapoorneshwarinagar, Mudalapalya,
Bengaluru and the accused persons
with common intention and in order to
cheat CW 1 and 2 have created
agreement of sale on 13/12/1989 and
GPA on 16/2/1990 and affidavits as if
executed by G.Kempaiah in favour of
accused no.1 Bylamma, even though he
died on 21/5/1988 and committed
cheating by personation and thereby
committed the offences u/s.419 r/w.511
of IPC ?
2) Whether prosecution proves beyond
reasonable doubt that on the aforesaid
date, time and place, accused persons
have filed objection before the BBMP not
to make B Khatha in the name of CW 1
and used the false documents in public
office, made false documents and also
forged the signature of G.Kempaiah and
thereby committed the offences u/s.467,
468, 471, 420 r/w.511 of IPC ?
3) Whether prosecution proves beyond
reasonable doubt that on 17/2/13 at
10.30 am., at site No.68/A, accused
persons wrongfully restrained the CW 1
from entering into the site and thereby
have committed an offence punishable
U/s.341 r/w.34 of IPC?
4) Whether prosecution proves beyond
reasonable doubt that on the aforesaid
6 CC.No.12902/13
date, time and place accused persons
threatened CW1 to do away his life
with dire consequences and thereby
have committed an offence punishable
U/s 506 IPC ?
5) What order?
8. My answer to the above points is as under;
Point No.1 to 4 In the Negative
Point No.5As per final order for the following :
REASONS
9. Point No.1 to 4 : Since all these points are interlinked
with each other, I have taken them together for common
discussion in order to avoid the repetition. According to the
prosecution, accused has committed an offences u/s.419,
467, 468, 471, 420, 511, 506, 341 r/w.34 of IPC. In order to
prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined
the complainant as PW.1. The PW 1 has deposed that he
knows the accused, accused no.2 is no more. He further
deposed that the site No.68A in Sy.No.52 of Malagal,
Annapurneshwarinagar belongs to him and the accused never
cheated him or threatened him. About 8 years ago, when he
went to police station, they have took the signature on two
7 CC.No.12902/13
documents which are the complaint and mahazar and they
have marked as Ex.P.1 & 2. He has deposed that he does not
know what has written in Ex.P.1 & 2. Thus he has totally
turned hostile to the case of the prosecution.
10. At request of learned senior APP this witness has
been treated as hostile witness and permission was accorded
to cross examine him. In the cross examination the learned
Sr.APP suggested the case of the prosecution and same has
been denied by the witness. On the basis of the above
evidence of PW.1 the court cannot come to conclusion that
the accused has committed the offence as alleged by the
prosecution. Here the PW.1 turned hostile, in the cross
examination he has categorically admitted that, he and
accused have compromised the matter. That is the reason
why PW.1 has not given any evidence supporting the case of
the prosecution. In a criminal justice system, if a tiny doubt
arises in the mind of the court, benefit of doubt shall be
extended to the accused. In this case, not only tiny doubt but
the strong doubt arise in the mind of the court, because the
victim himself has not supported the case of the prosecution.
Hence, the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the guilt of
the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, in my
opinion it is a fit case to extend benefit of doubt to the
8 CC.No.12902/13
accused. Accordingly point No.1 to 5 answered in the
Negative.
11. POINT NO.6 :
For the aforesaid reason and discussion, I proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
Acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. Accused No.2 is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/s.419, 467, 468, 471, 420, 511, 506, 341 r/w.34 of IPC. The bail bond executed by the accused no.2 stands cancelled. However, Accused no.2 shall execute personal bond of Rs.50,000/ by undertaking to appear before the appellate Court, if any appeal is filed.
It is not a fit case to award victim compensation as provided U/s.357(1) of Cr.P.C., (Dictated to the stenographer, script transcribed by her and then corrected directly on computer and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 11 th day of October 2022).
(B.C.Chandrashekar) XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
9 CC.No.12902/13ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the Prosecution:
PW1 : Bettaiah Documents marked for the Prosecution:
Ex.P1 : Complaint Ex.P1(a) : Signature Ex.P2 : Spot mahazar Ex.P2(a) : Signature
Witnesses examined for the accused: NIL Documents marked for the accused: NIL (B.C.Chandrashekar) XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.