Bangalore District Court
The State Of Karnataka Through vs Amruth.J on 15 November, 2022
1 CC.No.3361/19
KABC030095212019
IN THE COURT OF XXIV ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022
C.C. No.3361/19
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. Amruth.J, s/o.Jayaram.H.R,
19yrs, R/at.No.33, 2nd cross, 1st
main, Prashanthnagar, Bengaluru.
2. Sanjay.N.Halmat, s/o.Narayan,
19 yrs, No.25, 6th cross, BCC layout,
Chandra layout, Bengaluru
3. Abhilash.G, s/o.S.Gopi, 19 yrs,
R/at.No.850/39/1, 4th main, Vijayanagar,
2 CC.No.3361/19
Bengaluru.
4. Afroz Pasha, s/o.Fyroz Pasha, 20
yrs, No.19, 12th main, Vijayanagar,
Bengaluru.
Rep.by Sri.BKR, Advocate
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT : 30/05/2018
OF OFFENCE
DATE OF ARREST OF THE : Accused No.1 to 4 are on bail.
ACCUSED
OFFENCES ALLEGED : U/s.341, 323, 326 r/w.34 of IPC.
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT : 03/08/22
OF EVIDENCE
DATE OF CLOSING OF : 03/08/22
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.341, 323, 326 r/w.34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are
that the CW 1, 2, 11 and 12 are friends studying in various
3 CC.No.3361/19
colleges and the CW 11 has replied to a facebook message of a
girl who wanted to roam the whole world as 'ನನನನನ
ನ ಜಜೊತೆಯಲ
ಕರೆದನಕಜೊಕೊಂಡನ ಹಜೊಹೋಗನ ' for fun. In that regard, the accused
persons on 30/5/18 at 7.30 pm., within the limits of
Vijayanagar Police Station, near Square plate hotel, Magadi
road, the accused persons with common intention picked up
quarrel with CW 11, accused no.4 fisted on the face of CW 11,
at that time, the CW 1 intervened to pacify the quarrel.
Further on 31/5/18 at 1.00 pm., in a hotel near Hosahalli
park, Vijayanagar, the accused persons again with common
intention have wrongfully restrained CW 1 from moving
further, accused no.2 assaulted the CW 1 with iron piece, but
the CW 1 escaped, then accused no.1 assaulted the CW 1
with iron rod on his left side head and nose and caused
grievous bleeding injuries and also caused permanent organ
disability and thereby committed the offences u/s. 341, 323,
326 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.1 to 4 have arrested and
produced before the court, later on the counsel for accused
persons filed bail application, hence, they have released on
4 CC.No.3361/19
bail. After investigation, Investigating officer has submitted
the chargesheet against the accused persons for the offences
u/s.341, 323, 326 r/w.34 of IPC. The cognizance for the said
offences are taken. The copies of the prosecution papers
have furnished to the accused persons as contemplated
u/s.207 of Cr.P.C.,
4. After being heard the arguments before charge, as
there were no grounds to discharge the accused persons,
charge for the offences u/s. 341, 323, 326 r/w.34 of IPC have
been framed & read over, explained to the accused persons in
the language best known to them. The accused persons have
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 persons, the
prosecution has examined two witnesses as PW 1 and 2 out of
19 witnesses as cited in the chargesheet. 2 documents have
been marked as Ex.P.1 and 2. After prosecution evidence, the
accused persons have been examined u/s.313 of Cr.P.C., &
they have denied the prosecution evidence. The accused
persons have not chosen to submit the defence evidence.
6. Heard the arguments of learned APP and counsel for
accused persons. Perused, On the basis of the above, the
5 CC.No.3361/19
following points have arises for my consideration :
1) Whether prosecution proves beyond
reasonable doubt that on 30/5/18 at
7.30 pm., within the limits of
Vijayanagar Police Station, near
Square plate hotel, Magadi road, the
accused persons with common intention
picked up quarrel with CW 11 with
regard to message sent by CW 11 to one
girl in the facebook and assaulted him
with hands, then CW 1 intervened and
pacified the quarrel and further on
31/5/18 at 1.00 pm., in a hotel near
Gandhi park, Vijayanagar the accused
persons with common intention have
wrongfully restrained CW 1 from moving
further and assaulted him with hands
and thereby have committed an offence
punishable U/s 341 r/w 34 IPC ?
2) Whether prosecution further proves
beyond reasonable doubt that on the
above said date, time and place,
accused persons picked up quarrel with
CW.1 and 11 and assaulted CW1 and
11 with hands and caused simple hurt
and thereby have committed an offence
punishable U/s 323 r/w.34 of IPC ?
3) Whether prosecution further proves
beyond reasonable doubt that on the
above said date, time and place,
accused persons assaulted CW 1 with
iron rod on his left side head and nose
6 CC.No.3361/19
and caused grievous bleeding injuries to
CW.1 and thereby committed an
offence punishable U/s 326 r/w 34 of
IPC ?
4) What order?
7. My answer to the above points is as under;
Point No.1 to 3 In the Negative.
Point No.4As per final order for the following;
REASONS
8. Point No.1 to 3 : 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 the accused persons have committed the offences
u/s. 341, 323, 326 r/w.34 of IPC. In order to prove the guilt
of the accused persons, the prosecution has examined one of
the spot mahazar witness as PW 1 & he has deposed that
about 4 years ago, when he had been to see his friend Nikhil ,
the police took his signature on the mahazar, he has
identified the mahazar & he has identified his signature and it
is marked at Ex.P.1. But he has deposed that he does not
know the contents of the same and the police have not drawn
any mahazar in his presence. Thus he has turned hostile.
The Sr.APP has cross examined him by treating him as hostile
7 CC.No.3361/19
witness but nothing has elicited from his mouth about
drawing up of spot mahazar.
9. The prosecution further examined one of the seizure
mahazar witness as PW 2 and he has deposed that he does
not know the accused persons and about 34 years ago, when
he had been to see his friend CW 1, the police took his
signature on the mahazar, he has identified the mahazar and
he has identified his signature and it is marked at Ex.P.2. But
he has deposed that he does not know the contents of the
same and the police have not seized anything in his presence.
Thus he has turned hostile. The Sr.APP has cross examined
him by treating him as hostile witness but nothing has
elicited from his mouth about drawing up of seizure mahazar.
Except this evidence the prosecution has not produced any
other evidence. Thus, absolutely there is no any material
allegation against the accused persons to believe the guilt of
the accused persons and prosecution is required to place
material evidence of victims and eye witnesses of the incident.
10. It is significant to note here that in order to secure the
presence of complainant as well as other material witnesses
namely CW 1 to 3, 5, 6, 8 to 19, this court issued summons,
but their presence could not be secured. This court has also
issued the number of NBW including the proclamation
8 CC.No.3361/19
against the material witness such as CW 1 to 3, 5, 6, 8 to 19,
but Investigating officer has failed to execute the same & keep
present them before the court. Hence, with no option CW 1 to
3, 5, 6, 8 to 19 have dropped with a liberty to the prosecution
to produce the witnesses at any time without filing any recall
application. Inspite of that the prosecution has not make use
of the opportunity and examined the other material witnesses.
Thus, the evidence of PW 1 and 2 is only remains as an
evidence on behalf of the prosecution. But as discussed
above, PW 1 and 2 turned hostile and nothing material has
elicited from their mouth to warrants the conviction against
the accused persons. Hence, in the absence of material
evidence, the strong doubt accrued in the mind of the court
about the case of the prosecution as the prosecution has
utterly failed to prove the guilt of the accused persons by
examining the other material witnesses. 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 persons. In
this case, not only tiny doubt but the strong doubt arise in
the mind of the court. Hence, the prosecution has utterly
failed to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond all
reasonable doubt. Hence, in my opinion it is a fit case to
extend benefit of doubt to the accused persons. Accordingly
point under reference answered in the Negative.
9 CC.No.3361/19
11. POINT NO.2 :
For the aforesaid reason and discussion, I proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
Acting under section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. Accused No.1 to 4 are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/s. 341, 323, 326 r/w.34 of IPC.
The bail bond executed by the accused No.1 to 4 is stands cancelled. However, Accused No.1 to 4 shall execute personal bond of Rs.50,000/ each 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., Properties seized in PF.No.114/18 and 112/18 are worthless, ordered to be destroyed after the appeal period is over. (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 15th day of November 2022).
(B.C.Chandrashekar) XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
10 CC.No.3361/19ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the Prosecution:
PW1 : Sumanth.R PW 2 : Nikhil
Documents marked for the Prosecution:
Ex.P1 : Mahazar Ex.P1(a) : Signature Ex.P2 : Seizure Mahazar
Witnesses examined for the accused: NIL Documents marked for the accused: NIL (B.C.Chandrashekar) XXIV A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.