Bangalore District Court
State By J.P. Nagar Police Station vs No. : 1. Muralidhar @ Ramakrishna on 25 October, 2017
IN THE COURT OF THE 44TH ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 25th day of OCTOBER 2017
:Present:
Smt. Mala N.D., B.A.L., LL.B.,
44th ACMM, Bengaluru
C.C.No.22646/2009
Complainant : State by J.P. Nagar Police station
(By Asst. Public Prosecutor)
-V/s-
Accused No. : 1. Muralidhar @ Ramakrishna,
S/o Ramaswamy,
Aged about 58 years,
R/at No.93, Kirloskar Colony,
Near Shankarmata,
Mahalakshmipura,
Bengaluru.
2. Sundhar Bhat
(Case against accused No.2 is split up)
3. Smt. Vidyalatha @ Malathi,
W/o David,
Aged about 46 years,
R/at No.49/A, 7th Cross,
Vasanthappa Block,
Ganganagar,
Bengaluru.
4. S. Raghavendra @ Harish,
S/o R. Subbarao,
Aged about 31 years,
2 C.C.No.22646/2009
R/at No.31, 1st Cross,
Somanna Garden, Vidyaranyapura,
Bengaluru.
5. H.S. Shivaprasad @ Shivu,
S/o Siddaiah,
Aged about 35 years,
R/at No.395, 6th Main,
BEL Layout,
Vidyaranyapura,
Bengaluru.
6. Chandru,
S/o Kallappam,
Aged about 39 years,
R/at No.610/24,
4th Main,
Saharadha Colony,
Meenakshi Nagar,
Basaveshwara Nagar,
Bengaluru.
7. A.G. Subramanya Hegade,
S/o A.M. Ganapathi,
R/at No.284, Changaiah Layut,
Shastri Nagar,
Bengaluru.
8. Basanth @ Basavanthu,
S/o V. Venkatappa,
Aged about 33 years,
R/at No.19, 2nd Stage,
Vinayaka Layout, Vijayanagar,
Bengaluru.
9. C.M. Shyamsundar Rao
(Case against accused No.9 is split up)
3 C.C.No.22646/2009
JUDGMENT
The PSI of J.P. Nagar Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused No.1 to 9 for the offences punishable U/s.419, 468, 471, 420, 120(B) r/w 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
It is alleged that, accused No.1, 3 to 8 hatched a criminal conspiracy with an intention to make wrongful gain, accused No.2 induced C.W. 2 Sri. Venkataraju, that he is going to sell the flats which were built by him in the name of his wife C.W. 3 Smt. Bhagya, under the name and style as Sankarshan Apartments, situated at Puttenahalli, Sy.No.49, site bearing No.4, within the limits of J.P. Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, received all the relevant documents with regard to the aforesaid apartments, based on the same, accused No.2 obtained driving license in his name by affixing the photograph of accused No.1 with the help of accused No.9, who already had an account and accused No.1 got opened an account at Union Bank by impersonating himself as C.W. 2, accused No.5 and 6 by showing the apartments of C.W. 2 and 3, induced complainant C.W. 1 Sri. Ranganath Naikar to get flat in a cheaper rate, with the help of 4 C.C.No.22646/2009 accused No.4, 7 and accused No.8 being the bank agent, on the pretext of getting loan from ING Vysya Bank, obtained the signatures of the complainant on the relevant documents, all the accused persons through the complainant submitted an application for housing loan in the name of complainant, submitted forged and concocted documents by knowing fully well that they are fake documents received from C.W. 2 and 3, made believed the bank, got sanctioned the loan of Rs.43,58,000/- and on 09/07/2008, accused No.1 and 3 working as FDA in Revenue Department by impersonating themselves as C.W. 2 and 3, put thumb impressions and forged signatures of C.W. 2 and 3, got registered Flat No.102, belonging to C.W. 2 and 3 in the name of C.W. 1 in the Office of Senior Sub-
Registrar, J.P. Nagar, Bengaluru, received the D.D. amount of Rs.39,53,000/- which was sanctioned in the name of complainant, accused No.1 deposited the same in the aforesaid created bank account by impersonating himself as C.W. 2, at Union Bank, Malleshwaram branch, withdrawn the amount by using self cheques, utilized the said amount for his personal use and thereby cheated ING Vysya Bank and C.W. 1 to 3 with a fraudulent intention of 5 C.C.No.22646/2009 making unlawful gain and committed aforesaid offences.
Therefore, C.W. 1 Sri. Ranganath Naikar has lodged complaint before the jurisdictional police. As such, this case came to be registered against the accused persons. During the course of investigation I.O. visited the place of incident, drawn spot mahazar in the presence of the witnesses, seized the documents and subjected the same under P.F.No.10/2009, recorded the statement of witnesses and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against the accused persons for the aforesaid offences.
3. The accused No.1, 3 to 8 are on bail and they are represented through their counsel. Inspite of sufficient efforts accused No.2 and 9 were not secured before this court. Hence, case against them is split up.
4. The copies of the prosecution papers have been furnished to the accused persons as required under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. The cognizance of the offences punishable U/sec. 419, 468, 471, 420, 120(B) r/w 34 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 persons in the language known to 6 C.C.No.22646/2009 them, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the prosecution is called upon to prove its case.
6. The prosecution, in order to prove its case has examined C.W. 2 and 5 as P.W. 1 and 2 and got marked five documents at Ex.P1 to P.5. Though, the prosecution in order to prove its case has cited as many as 19 witnesses, except C.W. 2 and 5, none of the witnesses i.e. C.W. 1, 4, 6 to 19 have turned up before the court inspite of taking coercive steps like issuance of summons, warrants and even proclamation. It is to be observed that, the charge is framed in the year 2016 and till now C.W. 1, 4, 6 to 19 have been secured and no satisfactory explanation has been offered. Therefore, by considering the longstanding pendency of the case, they have been discharged from deposing evidence. As there is no incriminating evidence against the accused persons, recording of accused statement U/s.313 of Cr.P.C has been dispensed with. Hence, the case is posted for arguments.
7. Heard both the side and perused the material evidence on record.
7 C.C.No.22646/2009
8. The following points would arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.1, 3 to 8 along with split up accused No.2 and 9 in furtherance of their common intention, hatched a criminal conspiracy with an intention to make wrongful gain, induced complainant C.W. 1 Sri. Ranganath Naikar to get flat in a cheaper rate, by forging the signatures of C.W. 2 and 3, got registered Flat No.102, belonging to C.W. 2 and 3 in the name of C.W. 1 and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 120(B) r/w 34 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, accused persons in furtherance of common intention, by hatching a criminal conspiracy with an intention to make wrongful gain, induced C.W. 2 Sri. Venkataraju, that he is going to sell the flats which were built by him in the name of his wife C.W. 3 Smt. Bhagya, under the name and style as Sankarshan Apartmetns, situated at Puttenahalli, Sy.No.49, site bearing No.4, within the limits of J.P. Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, received all the relevant documents with regard to the aforesaid apartments, based on the same, accused No.2 obtained driving license in his name by affixing the photograph of accused No.1 with the help of accused No.9, who already had an account and accused No.1 got opened an account at Union Bank by impersonating himself as C.W. 2, induced complainant 8 C.C.No.22646/2009 C.W. 1 Sri. Ranganath Naikar to get flat in a cheaper rate and accused No.1 and 3 working as FDA in Revenue Department by impersonating themselves as C.W. 2 and 3, put thumb impressions and forged signatures of C.W. 2 and 3, got registered Flat No.102, belonging to C.W. 2 and 3 in the name of C.W. 1 in the Office of Senior Sub-Registrar, J.P. Nagar, Bengaluru, received the D.D. amount of Rs.39,53,000/- which was sanctioned in the name of complainant, accused No.1 deposited the same in the aforesaid created bank account by impersonating himself as C.W. 2, at Union Bank, Malleshwaram branch and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 419 r/w 34 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, accused persons in furtherance of common intention hatched a criminal conspiracy with an intention to make wrongful gain, by inducing C.W. 2 Sri. Venkataraju, that he is going to sell the flats which were built by C.W. 2 in the name of his wife C.W. 3 Smt. Bhagya, under the name and style as Sankarshan Apartmetns, situated at Puttenahalli, Sy.No.49, site bearing No.4, within the limits of J.P. Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, received all the relevant documents with regard to the aforesaid apartments, based on the same, accused No.2 obtained driving license in his name by affixing the photograph of accused No.1 with the help of accused No.9, who already had an account and accused No.1 got opened an 9 C.C.No.22646/2009 account at Union Bank by impersonating himself as C.W. 2, accused No.5 and 6 by showing the apartments of C.W. 2 and 3, induced complainant C.W. 1 Sri. Ranganath Naikar to get flat in a cheaper rate, with the help of accused No.4 and 7 and accused No.8 being the bank agent, on the pretext of getting loan from ING Vysya Bank, obtained the signatures of the complainant on the relevant documents, all the accused persons through the complainant submitted an application for housing loan in the name of complainant, submitted forged and concocted documents by knowing fully well that they are fake documents with a fraudulent intention of cheating and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 468 r/w 34 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, accused persons in furtherance of common intention accused by hatching a criminal conspiracy with an intention to make wrongful gain, created, concocted and forged the documents belonging to C.W. 2, induced C.W. 1 by showing said fake documents, made believed him to purchase flat No.102, belonging to C.W. 2 and 3, accused No.8 being the bank agent, on the pretext of getting loan from ING Vysya Bank, obtained the signatures of the complainant on the relevant documents, all the accused persons through the complainant submitted an application for housing loan in the name of complainant, submitted forged and concocted documents by knowing fully well that they are fake documents, used the 10 C.C.No.22646/2009 concocted documents as genuine one received from C.W. 2 and 3, made believed the bank, got sanctioned the loan of Rs.43,58,000/- and thereby committed an offence punishable U/s.471 r/w 34 of IPC?
5. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time, place and under aforesaid circumstances, accused persons in furtherance of common intention, hatched a criminal conspiracy with an intention to make wrongful gain, induced C.W. 2 Sri. Venkataraju, that he is going to sell the flats which were built by him in the name of his wife C.W. 3 Smt. Bhagya, under the name and style as Sankarshan Apartmetns, situated at Puttenahalli, Sy.No.49, site bearing No.4, within the limits of J.P. Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, received all the relevant documents with regard to the aforesaid apartments, based on the same, accused No.2 obtained driving license in his name by affixing the photograph of accused No.1 with the help of accused No.9, who already had an account and accused No.1 got opened an account at Union Bank by impersonating himself as C.W. 2, accused No.5 and 6 by showing the apartments of C.W. 2 and 3, induced complainant C.W. 1 Sri. Ranganath Naikar to get flat in a cheaper rate, with the help of accused No.4 and 7 and accused No.8 being the bank agent, on the pretext of getting loan from ING Vysya Bank, obtained the signatures of the complainant on the relevant documents, all the accused persons through the complainant submitted an application for housing loan in the name of 11 C.C.No.22646/2009 complainant, submitted forged and concocted documents by knowing fully well that they are fake documents received from C.W. 2 and 3, made believed the bank, got sanctioned the loan of Rs.43,58,000/- and on 09/07/2008, accused No.1 and 3 working as FDA in Revenue Department by impersonating themselves as C.W. 2 and 3, put thumb impressions and forged signatures of C.W. 2 and 3, got registered Flat No.102, belonging to C.W. 2 and 3 in the name of C.W. 1 in the Office of Senior Sub-Registrar, J.P. Nagar, Bengaluru, received the D.D. amount of Rs.39,53,000/- which was sanctioned in the name of complainant, accused No.1 deposited the same in the aforesaid created bank account by impersonating himself as C.W. 2, at Union Bank, Malleshwaram branch, with drawn the amount by using self cheques, utilized the said amount for his personal use and thereby cheated ING Vysya Bank and C.W. 1 to 3 with a fraudulent intention of making unlawful gain and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 420 r/w 34 of IPC?
6. What Order?
9.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 : IN THE NEGATIVE
12 C.C.No.22646/2009
Point No.5 : IN THE NEGATIVE
Point No.6: As per final order for the following REASONS
10.Points No.1 to 5: All these points involve similar set of facts and circumstances, hence, taken up together for common discussion.
11. The prosecution in order to establish its case has cited as many as 19 witnesses and successful in examining only two witnesses i.e. C.W. 2 and 5. This case has been registered on the back ground of accused persons hatching a criminal conspiracy, cheated C.W. 1 Sri. Ranganath Naikar in order to make an unlawful gain, thereby created fabricated documents, forged the signatures of C.W. 2 and 3, used the concocted documents as genuine documents, accused No.1 got obtained bank loan in the name of C.W. 1, deposited the said amount in a fictitious account created by impersonating himself as C.W. 2 and thereby committed aforesaid offences.
12. In this connection C.W. 2 Sri. Venkataraju.M., according to the prosecution whom accused No.1 impersonated himself as 13 C.C.No.22646/2009 C.W. 2, who is also a mahazar witness is examined as P.W. 1 before this court and has totally turned hostile, not identified the mahazars conducted in his presence, not deposed anything against accused persons, not identified them. Per contra, he has only identified his signatures on the mahazars. As such, nothing substantial has been elicited in his cross-examination.
13. Another independent witness C.W. 5 Sri. G. Ashwath Kumar is examined as P.W. 2, wherein he has also shown hostile attitude towards prosecution case, not deposed anything about the prosecution case. As such, nothing substantial has been elicited in his cross-examination also.
14. It is pertinent to note that, C.W. 1 Sri. Ranganath Naikar who has set the law into motion has not appeared before this court to put forth his case against accused persons, which literally weakens the case of prosecution, consequently, the prosecution has failed to establish the alleged cheating said to have been committed on C.W. 1 by the accused persons. In the absence of evidence of complainant and other independent witnesses, this court cannot hold accused No.1, 3 to 8 as guilty minded.
14 C.C.No.22646/2009
15. That apart, though the prosecution has cited as many as 19 witnesses, except C.W. 2 and 5, none of the witnesses i.e. C.W. 1, 4, 6 to 19, have turned up before the court inspite of taking coercive steps like issuance of summons, warrants and even proclamation. It is to be observed that, on 08/09/2016 this court has framed charge and this court has extended fullest assistance to secure the witnesses by issuing summons, warrants and even proclamation which can be seen from the order sheet. As such, by considering the long standing pendency of the case, C.W. 1, 4, 6 to 19 have been discharged from deposing the evidence. As a result, the prosecution has failed to prove the charge leveled against accused No.1, 3 to 8 with cogent, convincing and corroborative evidence. Therefore, above points No.1 to 5 are answered in the Negative.
16.Point No.6: In view of the negative findings on the above points No.1 to 5, I proceed to pass the following:- 15 C.C.No.22646/2009
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1, 3 to 8 are found not guilty and acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 419, 468, 471, 420, 120(B) r/w 34 of IPC.
The bail & bail bond of the accused persons and sureties shall stands cancelled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer through computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 25th day of October 2017).
(Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION P.W. 1: Venkataraju.M. P.W. 2: G. Ashwath Kumar
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex.P. 1 : Spot Mahazar Ex.P.1(a) : Signature of PW-1 Ex.P. 2 : Seizure mahazar Ex.P.2(a) : Signature of P.W. 1 Ex.P.3 &4 : Statements of P.W. 1 Ex.P.5 : Statement of P.W. 2
3. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE NIL
4. LIST OF THE METERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION NIL (Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.16 C.C.No.22646/2009
Judgment pronounced in Open
Court vide separate:-
ORDER
Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C.,
accused No.1, 3 to 8 are found not
guilty and acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 419, 468, 471, 420, 120(B) r/w 34 of IPC.
The bail & bail bond of the
accused persons and sureties shall
stands cancelled.
(Mala N.D)
XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.