Bangalore District Court
State By Yelahanka Police Station vs No. : 1. Chandrashekar @ Chandrappa on 9 August, 2018
IN THE COURT OF THE 44TH ADDL.CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU
Dated: This the 9th day of AUGUST 2018
:Present:
Smt. Mala N.D., B.A.L., LL.B.,
44th ACMM, Bengaluru
C.C.No.23517/2016
Complainant : State by Yelahanka Police station
(By Sr. Asst. Public Prosecutor)
-V/s-
Accused No. : 1. Chandrashekar @ Chandrappa,
S/o K. Rangappa,
Aged about 65 years,
R/at No.25, 24th Cross, Maruthi Nagar,
Yelahanka, Bengaluru.
2. Shivashankar @ Shankar,
S/o Venkatesh,
Aged about 45 years,
R/at Srinivas's house,
Masjid Road, Chowdeshwari Layout,
Yelahanka, Bengaluru.
(By. Sri. Kemparaja, advocate )
JUDGMENT
The PSI of Yelahanka Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused No.1 and 2 for the offences punishable U/s. 420, 285 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3, 7 of 2 C.C.No.23517/2016 Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Regulation Act, 2000.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
It is alleged that, C.W. 1 Sri. K.R. Nagaraj, PI, Yelahanka Police Station along with C.W. 2 and 3 on receipt of credible information conducted raid over a compound building (ªÀoÀgÁ) belonging to one Srinivas, situated at Chowedeshwari Layout, Masjid Road, within the limits of Yelahanka Police Station, on 21/02/2016 at about 5.15 p.m. in the evening, found accused persons refilling LPG of different Gas Company to the other small cylinders and gas lights with the help of workers, without holding any valid license, with a fraudulent intention of making an unlawful gain, in order to sell the same for a higher prices to earn more profit and thereby cheated general public as well as different Gas Companies, acted so rashly and negligently so as to endanger human life and public property with fire or combustible matter viz., LPG and committed aforesaid offences. Therefore, based on the report of C.W. 1 3 C.C.No.23517/2016 Sri. K.R. Nagaraj, Police Inspector, Yelahanka Police Station, this case came to be registered against accused persons.
During the course of investigation I.O. visited the place of incident, drawn spot mahazar in the presence of the witnesses, seized item No.1 to 4 and subjected the same under P.F.No.19/2016, recorded the statement of witnesses and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against accused persons for the aforesaid offences.
3. The accused No.1 and 2 are on bail and they are represented through their counsel.
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. 420, 285 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3, 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Regulation Act, 2000, 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 them, they pleaded not guilty and 4 C.C.No.23517/2016 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. 8, 2 and 1 as P.W. 1 to 3 and got marked five document at Ex.P1 to P.5. Though, the prosecution in order to prove its case has cited as many as 08 witnesses, except C.W. 8, 2 and 1, none of the witnesses i.e. C.W. 3 to 7 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 2017 and till now C.W. 3 to 7 have been secured and no satisfactory explanation has been offered. Therefore, they have been discharged from deposing evidence.
7. After completion of prosecution side evidence, the statement of accused persons as required under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. has been recorded, wherein accused have denied the incriminating evidence adduced against them and not chosen to lead their side defense evidence. Hence, the case is posted for arguments.
5 C.C.No.23517/2016
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, C.W. 1 Sri. K.R. Nagaraj, PI, Yelahanka Police Station along with C.W. 2 and 3 on receipt of credible information conducted raid over a compound building (ªÀoÀgÁ) belonging to one Srinivas, situated at Chowedeshwari Layout, Masjid Road, within the limits of Yelahanka Police Station, on 21/02/2016 at about 5.15 p.m. in the evening, found accused persons refilling LPG of different Gas Company to the other small cylinders and gas lights with the help of workers, without holding any valid license, with a fraudulent intention of making an unlawful gain, in order to sell the same for a higher prices to earn more profit and thereby cheated general public as well as different Gas Companies, acted so rashly and negligently so as to endanger human life and public property with fire or combustible matter viz., LPG and thereby committed offences punishable under Section 420, 285 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3, 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Regulation Act, 2000?6 C.C.No.23517/2016
2. What Order?
10. My findings on the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : IN THE NEGATIVE Point No.2: As per final order for the following REASONS
11.Point No.1: The prosecution in order to establish its case has cited as many as 08 witnesses and successful in examining C.W. 8, 2 and 1 as P.W. 1 to 3. This case has been registered on the back ground of illegal refilling of LPG from different companies Gas Cylinders to other small cylinders and gas lights, without there being any valid license, with a fraudulent intention of making unlawful gain, in order to sell the same to the general public on a higher price, acted so rashly and negligently so as to endanger human life and public property with fire or combustible matter viz., LPG and thereby committed aforesaid offences.
12. In this connection complainant C.W. 1 and one more official witness i.e. C.W. 8 are examined as P.W. 3 and 1, wherein they have deposed as per their complaint 7 C.C.No.23517/2016 averments. They have also deposed about conducting mahazar and seizing cylinders and submitting report against accused.
13. Further, one independent seizure mahazar witness i.e. C.W. 2 has been examined as P.W. 2, wherein he has completely turned hostile, not deposed anything against accused, not identified the seizure mahazar, per contra he identifies his signature on seizure mahazar at Ex.P.1(b), by pleading its ignorance, as such nothing substantial has been elicited in his cross-examination.
14. It is pertinent to note that, though C.W. 1 and 8 have deposed against accused persons, to corroborate and establish the seizure conducted by C.W. 1 Sri. Nagaraj, none of the independent seizure mahazar witnesses and eye witnesses have been examined before this court, which is a fatal blow to the prosecution case. Though, one independent witness is examined before this court, he has shown his hostile attitude towards prosecution case. Under such circumstances, in the absence of evidence of other 8 C.C.No.23517/2016 material witnesses, this court cannot hold the accused persons as guilty minded.
15. That apart, though the prosecution has cited as many as 08 witnesses, except C.W. 8, 2 and 1, none of the witnesses i.e. C.W. 3 to 7 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 09/08/2017 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, they have been discharged from deposing the evidence. As a result, the prosecution has failed to prove the charge leveled against accused persons with cogent, convincing and corroborative evidence. Therefore, above point No.1 is answered in the Negative.
16.Point No.2: In view of the negative findings on the above point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:- 9 C.C.No.23517/2016
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 and 2 are found not guilty and acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 420, 285 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3, 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Regulation Act, 2000.
The bail & bail bond of the accused 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 9th day of August 2018).
(Mala N.D) XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION P.W. 1: Ramakrishna Reddy.M.B. P.W. 2: Manjunath.A P.W. 3: K.R. Nagaraj
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex.P. 1 : Mahazar Ex.P.1(a) : Signature of P.W. 1 Ex.P.1(b) : Signature of P.W. 2 Ex.P.1(c) : Signature of P.W. 3 Ex.P.2 : Report Ex.P.2(a) : Signature of P.W. 1 Ex.P.2(b) : Signature of P.W. 3 Ex.P.3 : FIR Ex.P.3(a) : Signature of P.W. 1 Ex.P.4&5 : Photos
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.10 C.C.No.23517/2016
Judgment pronounced in Open Court vide separate:-
ORDER Acting U/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 and 2 are found not guilty and acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 420, 285 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3, 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Regulation Act, 2000.
The bail & bail bond of the
accused and sureties shall stands
cancelled.
(Mala N.D)
XLIV Addl.C.M.M., B'lore.
11 C.C.No.23517/2016