Bangalore District Court
State By K.S.Layout vs (Case Against Accused No.1 Is on 2 December, 2022
IP
KABC030403432017
NAIK
Digitally signed
by I P NAIK
Date: 2022.12.02
16:04:18 +0530
IN THE COURT OF THE 30TH ADDL.CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 2nd day of December, 2022
:Present: Sri. I.P.Naik, B.A., LL.B.(Spl),
30th ACMM, Bengaluru
Judgment U/s.355 of Cr.P.C.
C.C.No. 16062/2017
Date of Offence 01.01.2012
Complainant State by K.S.Layout, Police
Station.
V/s.
Accused
(Case against Accused No.1 is
decided in C.C.No.15169/2013
2. Kaali S/o Kaveri
Aged about 32 years
R/at Near Nageshwara Garden
Near Puri Patti, Kalasipalya,
Bengaluru.
Permanent address:
Adagawadi, Dharmapuri District,
Tamilnadu.
2 C.C.No.16062/2017
Offences U/s.457 and 380 of IPC.
Plea Recorded on 19.11.2022 and
accused persons Pleaded not
guilty.
313 Statement recorded Dispensed with
on:
Final Oder Accused No.2 is acquitted
Date of Order 02-12-2022
*****
JUDGMENT
The PSI of K.S.Layout, Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused persons for the offences punishable U/s.457 and 380 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
It is alleged that, on 01.01.2012, in the night, accused persons committed theft of cash belonging to CW.1 Smt.Ranjitha Shetty, by illegally tress passing into her house bearing No.4051, situated at 50 feet road, 16th cross, within the limits of K.S.Layout Police Station and thereby committed aforesaid offences.3 C.C.No.16062/2017
3. Therefore, CW.1 Smt.Ranjitha Shetty has lodged complaint before the jurisdictional police. As such, this case came to be registered against accused persons. Thereafter, IO visited the place of incident, drawn mahazar, seized cash involved in this case and reported the same under PF No.66/2012, recorded the statement of witnesses and after completion of investigation, filed charge sheet against accused persons for the aforesaid offences.
4. This split up case registered against accused No.2 as per the orders passed by this court on 23.05.2017. Now accused No.2 has appeared before the court. Thereafter charge has been framed and readover to accused, accused pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried. Hence case is posted for evidence. The Ld.Sr.APP has filed a memo stating that evidence recorded in CC No.19169/2019 is also consider to this case also. Accordingly memo is allowed and evidence recorded in original CC.No.19169/2019 is considered to this case also. In this case there is no incriminating evidence 4 C.C.No.16062/2017 against accused No.2. Accordingly statement of accused No.2 is dispensed with.
5. Heard both the side and perused the material evidence on record.
6. The following points would arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on 01.01.2012, in the night, accused persons illegally tress passed into the house of CW.1 Smt.Ranjitha Shetty, bearing No.4051, situated at 50 feet road, 16th cross, within the limits of K.S.Layout police station and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 457 of IPC., within my cognizance.
2. Further, you accused persons on the aforesaid date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, accused persons committed theft of cash belonging to 5 C.C.No.16062/2017 CW.1 Smt.Ranjitha Shetty, by illegally tress passing into her house and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 380 of IPC, within my cognizance.?
3. What order.?
7. My findings on the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.2 : IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.3 : As per final order
......................... for the following.., REASONS
8. Point No. 1 & 2:- Both these points involved similar set of facts and circumstances, hence, taken up together for common discussion.
9. In this case, accused No.1 has been alleged of committing theft of cash belonging to CW.1 Smt.Ranjitha Shetty, 6 C.C.No.16062/2017 from her house bearing No.4051, situated at 50 feet road, 16 th cross, within the limits of K.S.Layout police station.
10. The prosecution in order to substantiate its case, has examined one official witnesses CW.10 as PW.1, who has deposed about apprehending of accused No.2, producing her before SHO and submitting her report, nothing substantial has been elicited in the cross-examination of this witness.
11. Further, it is pertinent to note that, CW.1 Smt.Ranjitha Shetty, who has set the law into motion and according to prosecution in whose house accused No.1 committed theft of cash, has not appeared before this court to put her case, which weakens the case of prosecution and in the absence of material evidence of complainant it would not be proper to hold accused No.2 as guilty minded.
12. That apart, though the prosecution has cited as many as 13 witnesses, except CW.10 none of the witnesses i.e. CW.1 to 9, 11 7 C.C.No.16062/2017 to 13 have turned up before the court in spite of taking coercive steps like issuance of summons, warrants and proclamation. It is to be observed that, on 30.08.2017, this court has framed charge and this court has extended fullest assistance to secure the witnesses by issuing summons, warrants and proclamation which can be seen from the order sheet. Therefore, CW.1 to 9, 11 to 13 have been discharged from deposing the evidence . As such, the prosecution has failed to prove its case against accused No.1 beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, benefit of doubt has to be extended in favour of accused No.1. As a result, the prosecution has failed to prove the charges leveled against accused No.1 with cogent, convincing and corroborative evidence. Accordingly, Point No.1 & 2 are answered in the Negative.
13. Point No.3: In view of the Negative findings on the above point No.1 & 2, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER The Powers confirmed upon me U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused No.2 is acquitted of the alleged offence punishable U/s.457 and 380 of IPC.8 C.C.No.16062/2017
The bail bonds of accused persons and surety extended for further 6 months in order to comply Sec.437 (a) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, this bail bonds automatically stands cancelled.
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, hence, granting of compensation of U/s.357 of Cr.P.C. is declined.
(Dictated to the Stenographer through computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 2 nd day of December, 2022).
(I.P Naik.) 30 A.C.M.M., B'lore.
th ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
P.W. 1 : Madhumathi . LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
NIL
3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE NIL
4. LIST OF THE METERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION NIL (I.P.Naik) 30th Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.9 C.C.No.16062/2017
Judgment pronounced in Open Court vide separate:-
ORDER The Powers confirmed upon me U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. accused No.2 is acquitted of the alleged offence punishable U/s.457 and 380 of IPC.
The bail bonds of accused persons and surety extended for further 6 months in order to comply Sec.437 (a) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, this bail bonds automatically stands cancelled.
The prosecution fails to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, hence, granting of compensation of U/s.357 of Cr.P.C. is declined.
(I.P.Naik) 30th Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.10 C.C.No.16062/2017