Bangalore District Court
State By Yelahanka New Town Police ... vs V. Shashidhar on 8 January, 2019
IN THE COURT OF THE 44TH ADDL.CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 8th day of JANUARY 2019
:Present:
Smt. Mala N.D., LL.M.,
44th ACMM, Bengaluru
C.C.No.14450/2016
Complainant : State by Yelahanka New Town Police station
(By Sr. Asst. Public Prosecutor)
-V/s-
Accused : V. Shashidhar,
S/o Venugopal Naidu,
Aged about 56 years,
R/at No.1184, 9th 'B' Cross,
Behind RTO complex, Yelahanka New Town,
Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
The PSI of Yelahanka New Town Police Station has filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/s. 324, 504 and 506 of IPC.
2 C.C. No.14450/2016
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
It is alleged that, on the request of accused, C.W. 1 Sri. Muddaiah, being an advocate filed Vakalath on behalf of him in both civil and criminal cases, was taking care of accused cases, there was some differences in connection with payment of fees, when the same was asked, accused used to postpone the same on one or the other pretext, as such, C.W. 1 expressed to retire from all his cases.
When such being the case, on 01/01/2016, at about 2.15 p.m. in the afternoon, when C.W. 1 Sri. Muddaiah along with his friends C.W. 3 Sri. C.M. Narayanaswamy and C.W. 4 Sri. M. Kalandhar were standing besides Ekalavya Institute of Sports and Science Stores, situated at RTO complex, Yelahanka New Town 'B" Sector, within the limits of Yelahanka New Town police station, accused came to the said spot along with his son, picked up quarrel with C.W. 1, abused him in filthy language, assaulted on left portion of C.W. 1's head with a cricket bat, again when accused No.1 tried to assault C.W. 1 with the said bat, C.W. 1 brought his left hand to avoid the said hit, as a result C.W. 1 sustained injuries on his left hand thumb and left portion of his chest, caused grievous bleeding injuries, when C.W. 4 and 5 being the friends of C.W. 1 tried to intervene and pacify the quarrel, accused pulled 3 C.C. No.14450/2016 C.W. 1 till KHB compound wall by posing threat to his life with dire consequences and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.
Therefore, C.W.1 Sri. Muddaiah has lodged complaint before the jurisdictional police. As such, this case came to be registered against accused. During the course of investigation, I.O. visited the place of incident, drawn spot mahazar, seized one cricket bat and subjected the same under P.F. No.1/2016, recorded the statement of witnesses, obtained wound certificate from the concerned medical authority and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against the accused for the aforesaid offences.
3. The accused is on bail and he is represented through his counsel.
4. The copies of the prosecution papers have been furnished to the accused as required under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. The cognizance of the offences punishable U/sec. 324, 504 and 506 of IPC has been taken as per Sec.190 of Cr.P.C.
5. The charge is framed, contents of charge have been read over and explained to the accused in the language known to him, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the prosecution is called upon to prove its case.
4 C.C. No.14450/2016
6. The prosecution, in order to prove its case has examined its C.W. 5, 2 and 1 as P.W. 1 to 3 and got marked two documents at Ex.P1 and P.2. At this stage, it is brought to court notice that, complainant being friend of accused, has compromised the matter and not intending to prosecute the case against accused. Therefore, in order to promote harmonious relationship among themselves evidence of other witnesses has been dropped as not required by rejecting the prayer of learned A.P.P.
7. After completion of evidence from prosecution side, the statement of accused as required under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded, wherein accused has denied the incriminating evidence adduced against him and not chosen to lead his side defense evidence. Hence, the case is posted for arguments.
8. Heard both the side and perused the material evidence on record.
9. The following points would arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on the request of accused, C.W. 1 Sri. Muddaiah, being an advocate filed Vakalath on behalf of him in both civil and criminal cases, was taking care of accused cases, there was some differences in connection with payment of fees, when the same 5 C.C. No.14450/2016 was asked, accused used to postpone the same on one or the other pretext, as such, C.W. 1 told that he will retire from his cases. When such being the case, on 01/01/2016, at about 2.15 p.m. in the afternoon, when C.W. 1 Sri. Muddaiah along with his friends C.W. 3 Sri. C.M. Narayanaswamy and C.W. 4 Sri. M. Kalandhar were standing besides Ekalavya Institute of Sports and Science Stores, situated at RTO complex, Yelahanka New Town 'B" Sector, within the limits of Yelahanka New Town police station, accused came to the said spot along with his son, accused picked up quarrel with C.W. 1, abused him in filthy language and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 504 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances accused picked up quarrel with C.W. 1, assaulted on left portion of C.W. 1's head with a cricket bat, again when accused No.1 tried to assault C.W. 1 with the said bat, C.W. 1 brought his left hand to avoid the said hit, as a result C.W. 1 sustained injuries on his left hand thumb and left portion of his chest, caused grievous bleeding injuries and thereby committed an offence punishable U/s. 324 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, accused picked up quarrel with C.W. 1, when C.W. 4 and 5 being the friends of C.W. 1 tried to intervene and pacify the quarrel, accused pulled C.W. 1 till KHB compound wall by posing threat to his life with dire consequences and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 506 of IPC?6 C.C. No.14450/2016
4. What Order?
10. My findings on the above points are as follows:
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
11. Points No.1 to 3: All these points involve similar set of facts and circumstances, hence, taken up together for common discussion.
12. This case has been registered on the back ground of an assault said to have been caused on the complainant by the accused.
13. In order to establish its case, the prosecution has cited as many as 08 witnesses and examined C.W. 5, 2 and 1 as P.W. 1 to 3. Among them, C.W. 5 Sri. N. Basha Saheb an eye witness, a common friend of both complainant and accused has deposed by stating that he has witnessed the alleged incident. Another witness C.W.2 Sri. M. Udaya a mahazar witness has spoken about drawing up of mahazar on the alleged place of incident. On the contrary, 7 C.C. No.14450/2016 complainant who is examined as P.W. 3, has totally turned hostile, not deposed anything against accused and thereby not supported the case of prosecution, As such, nothing substantial has been elicited in his cross-examination. Under the circumstances, sole evidence of an eye witness is not useful to hold the accused as guilty minded. Later, it is brought to the court notice that, complainant being a friend of accused, has compromised the matter and not intending to prosecute the case against accused. Therefore, in order to promote harmonious relationship among themselves evidence of other witnesses has been dropped as not required by rejecting the prayer of learned A.P.P. As a result, the prosecution has failed to prove the charges leveled against the accused with cogent, convincing and corroborative evidence. Therefore, above points No.1 to 3 are answered in the Negative.
14.Point No.4: In view of the negative findings on the above points No.1 to 3, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused is found not guilty and acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 324, 504, 506 of IPC.8 C.C. No.14450/2016
The bail & bail bond of the accused and surety shall stands cancelled.
One cricket bat seized and subjected under P.F. No.01/2016 being worthless is ordered to be destroyed after the expiry of appeal period.
(Dictated to the Stenographer through computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 8th day of JANUARY 2019).
(Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION P.W. 1: N. Basha Saheb P.W. 2: Shaik Babu P.W. 3: Muddaiah
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex.P. 1 : Mahazar Ex.P.1(a) : Signature of PW-2 Ex.P.1(b) : Signature of P.W. 3 Ex.P.2 : Complaint Ex.P.2(a) : Signature of P.W. 3
3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE Ex.D.1: Marked portion of statement
4. LIST OF THE METERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION M.O.1: Cricket bat (Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.9 C.C. No.14450/2016
Judgment pronounced in Open Court vide separate:-
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., the accused is found not guilty and acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 324, 504, 506 of IPC.
The bail & bail bond of the accused and surety shall stands cancelled.
One cricket bat seized and subjected under P.F. No.01/2016 being worthless is ordered to be destroyed after the expiry of appeal period.
(Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
10 C.C. No.14450/2016