Bangalore District Court
(Represented By The Learned App) vs For The Offences Punishable Under on 25 October, 2021
1 CC 6565 of 2021
IN THE COURT OF XLI (41ST) ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25th DAY OF OCTOBER 2021
PRESENT
SRI S.S.BHARATH M.A. LL.M.,
ST
XLI (41 ) ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
BENGALURU
CRIMINAL CASE NUMBER 6565 OF 2021
BETWEEN
1. STATE represented by
Beguru Police. ....COMPLAINANT
(Represented by the learned APP)
AND
1. Rajesh Kumar S/o Banwarilal
Aged about 22 years,
R/at No.45, Maruthi Building,
Chikkabeguru Road, Kudlu Gate,
Bengaluru City.
Permanently residing at
Haripura Village, Banara Post,
Churu District, Rajasthan State.
2. Vikas Kumar S/o Mahinder Singh,
Aged about 22 years,
R/at NO.45, Maruthi Building,
Chikkabeguru Road, Kudlu Gate,
Bengaluru City.
2 CC 6565 of 2021
Permanently residing at
Boss Maharaj Village,
Nuhanda Post, Raj Ghar Tahsil,
Churu District,
Rajasthan State.
....ACCUSED
(Represented by Sri.M.K.Raghavendra., Advocate)
BEGURU POLICE HAVE CHARGE SHEETED THE
ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 435 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC.
AFTER COMPLETION OF ADJUDICATION, THIS CASE
COMING ON FOR JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING...
Offences alleged u/s : 435 R/W Section
34 of IPC
Charge sheet filed on : 16032021
Trial commenced on : 21102021
Trial completed on : 21102021
Judgment date : 25102021
Total duration : DaysMonths Years
09 07 00
JUDGMENT
1. Case of the prosecution is as under; It is alleged that the PW1 is a driver at "Safe Quality Packers and Movers company." He drives the goods vehicle bearing its No.KA01AD1623. PW2 is a helper. On 19/11/2020 at about 5.00 p.m., 3 CC 6565 of 2021 the PW2 and PW1 both have parked their Bolero Vehicle near a two wheeler Yamaha Street Rally bearing its No.KA01JD7679, near a place where CW4 resides i.e., H.No.33/3, near Gold Finch Hotel, Crescent road, near Race course, Bengaluru. Further they have kept the laptop, kitchen itms worth Rs.03,00,000/ inside the Bolero vehicle, which had been received by them for the purpose of sending them in courier to Nasik. The said Bolero was parked infront of house of PW2. Both these accused did set fire to the said Bolero vehicle. Both PW1 and 2 suffered monetary loss to the tune of Rs.05,00,000/.
2. The investigation officer visited the spot, drew the mahazar and seized the articles and recorded the statements of the witnesses. Upon completion of his investigation, he charge sheeted the accused for the offences aforementioned.
4 CC 6565 of 2021
3. This court has taken the cognizance of the offences punishable under section 435 R/w Section 34 of IPC. As per the directions of the court, CC.No.6565 of 2021 came to be registered. In compliance of section 207 of Cr.P.C, the copies of the charge sheet and other prosecution papers came to be supplied to the accused.
4. The court, after being satisfied as to existence of materials against the accused to proceed further in this matter, framed the charge, read over the same to the accused in Kannada language in which they claimed then to be conversant with. But they did not plead guilty and they claimed then, to be tried. Therefore, this court issued summons to the witnesses.
5. Prosecution has examined CW1 as PW1 and CW5 as PW2. Further prosecution has relied upon Ex.P.1 to 3 as well. They did not support the case of the 5 CC 6565 of 2021 prosecution. Keeping in mind, the nature of their evidence, this court has dropped other witnesses CW2 to 4 and CW6 to 13, only to minimize the time consumption in adjudication of this matter, as PW1 and 2 are being material witnesses in this matter, and as they only did turn hostile to the case of the prosecution. Accordingly this court has dispensed with the statement of accused, which ought to have been recorded under section 313 of Cr.P.C., if any incriminating evidence would have been adduced by the prosecution against accused.
6. Heard the learned Sr.APP.
7. Heard the learned counsel for accused.
8. Following points arise for determination;
1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that both these accused with common object and having evil intention in their mind have set the said Bolero Vehicle to fire, where both PW1 6 CC 6565 of 2021 and 2 have kept their belongings worth Rs.03,00,000/ to send those materials to Nasik by way of courier, the PW1 and 2 have suffered monetary loss to the tune of Rs.05,00,000/ as those items got burnt and the accused are liable to be punished for an offence punishable under sections 435 R/w section 34 of IPC ?
2) what order ?
9. Above points are answered as under; Points' no.01: In the Negative Point no.02: As per final orders for the following reasons...;
REASONS The prosecution is duty bound to prove the guilt alleged as above against accused. The burden to prove the aspects stated herein above against the accused, heavily lies upon the prosecution.
10. Points No.01; Law present in section 435 of IPC is that whoever commits a mischief by fire or by using 7 CC 6565 of 2021 explosive substance with an intention to cause damage to a property beyond Rs.100/ then such accused shall be punished.
11. For the purpose of clarity Section 435 of IPC is hereby extracted below;
Section 435 in The Indian Penal Code Mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to cause damage to amount of one hundred or (in case of agricultural produce) ten rupees.--Whoever commits mischief by fire or any explosive substance intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, damage to any property to the amount of one hundred rupees or upwards 1[or (where the property is agricultural produce) ten rupees or upwards], shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
12. Both PW1 and 2 did not support the case of the prosecution. They both deposed that the accused never put them to any monetary loss and they have not set any vehicle to fire and there were some 8 CC 6565 of 2021 exchanges of words between them and therefore they did submit information to police etc. In their examinations in chief they have put a case of the prosecution to dark and therefore their evidence is of no help to the case of the prosecution.
13. In the cross examination learned Senior APP did not elicit any answers from them, which would dismantle their evidence etc. Hence, nothing remains in the case and case of the prosecution fails, therefore, the point No.1 is hereby answered in the negative.
14. Point no.2; The circumstances warrant the following orders for the foregoing reasons;
OPERATIVE PORTION Invoking section 248(1) of Cr.P.C, accused Nos.1 and 2 are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 435 R/w Section 34 of IPC. 9 CC 6565 of 2021 The bail bonds and surety bonds of the accused Nos.1 and 2 will be in force till completion of the appeal period, thereafter, they shall stand cancelled.
IO is directed to furnish a report regarding the properties mentioned in PF No.119/2020 (stated in SI.No.4,) dated 20/11/2020 the items Nos.1 and 2 forthwith and shall receive further oders. (Dictated to the stenographer, typed by him, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court today, that is on 25102021) S.S.BHARATH XLI (41ST) ACMM, BENGALURU 10 CC 6565 of 2021 ANNEXURES List of witnesses examined on behalf of prosecution: PW.1 : Kundan PW.2 : Dileep Kumar List of documents marked on behalf of the Prosecution: Ex.P.1 : Complaint Ex.P.1(a) : Signature of PW1 Ex.P.2 : Spot Mahazar Ex.P.2(a) : Signature of PW1 Ex.P.3 : Statement of PW2 List of witnesses examined on behalf of accused : NIL List of documents marked on behalf of the accused : NIL S.S.BHARATH XLI (41ST) ACMM, BENGALURU