Bangalore District Court
State By Parappana vs Has Got Introduced Himself To Cw.1 And ... on 23 May, 2022
1 CC No.13175/2020
IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, AT BENGALURU.
Dated this the 23rd day of May 2022
Present : Sri.Arun Sadashiv Gudigenavar,
B.A., LL.B., (Hon's) L.L.M.,
IX Addl.C.M.M., Bengaluru.
CC NO.13175/2020
1.C.C.No. 13175/2020
2.Date of offence 14/02/2019
3.Complainant State by Parappana
Agrahara Police Station.
4.Accused Kumar S/o.Late Venkatesh
Aged about 21 years,
R/o. Veerabhadraswamy
Layout, Doddanagamangala
Electronic City, Bengaluru.
5. Offences U/Sec. 354(A), 384, 504 &
complained of 506 of IPC.
2 CC No.13175/2020
6.Plea Accused pleaded not guilty.
7.Final Order Accused is acquitted.
8.Date of Order 23/05/2022.
JUDGMENT
The Police Sub-Inspector of Parappana Agrahara Police Station, Bengaluru has filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable u/Sec. 354(A), 384, 504 and 506 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:
It is the case of the prosecution that CW.1 Kumari Reshma is residing at house No.3, situated at 4 th Cross, Munireddy Layout, Doddanagamangala village. The accused has got introduced himself to CW.1 and made 3 CC No.13175/2020 friendship with her and used to make phone calls to her very often. Further it is the case of the prosecution that on 14-2-2019 the accused has made phone call to CW.1 and expressed his love and also insisted her to love him. But CW.1 has refused his proposal and tried to convince him to remain as a friend. It is also the case of the prosecution that in the month of October CW.1 has visited the house of the accused to meet his younger sister and at that time the accused misbehaved with her and thereafter, started torturing her to accept his love proposal and even he has gone to the extent of threatening her to spoil their family reputation. In this regard, the accused has demanded sum of Rs.20,000/- from the parents of CW.1 in order to stop following CW.1. The accused has also given life threat to CW.1. Out of fear the mother of CW.1 has given sum of Rs.10,000/- to the accused. But in spite of it the accused has 4 CC No.13175/2020 continued to torture CW.1. In this regard, CW.1 lodged first information statement. Based on the same FIR came to be registered in Crime No.430/2019 for the offences punishable u/Sec. 354(A), 384, 504 and 506 of IPC. Thereafter, CW.9 conducted investigation and filed charge sheet for the above said offences against the accused.
3. After registration of FIR the accused has been arrested and produced before this Court. Later he has been enlarged on bail. After filing of the charge sheet this Court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable u/Sec. 354(A), 384, 504 and 506 against the accused and issued summons to him. In response to the summons the accused has appeared before this Court. The copy of the charge sheet has been furnished to the accused as per Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. Subsequently, 5 CC No.13175/2020 the charge has been framed and read over to accused. But he has pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the case has been posted for prosecution evidence.
4. The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined in all three witnesses as PW.1 to PW.3 and got marked 5 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5. PW.1 to PW.3 have turned hostile to the prosecution case and submitted that they have compromised the case with the accused. Hence, issuance of the summons to the other witnesses has been dispensed with as it would not serve any purpose. Further the recording of the statement of the accused u/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. has also been dispensed with.
5. I have heard the arguments of both sides. Perused 6 CC No.13175/2020 the entire oral evidence and documents placed on record.
6. The points that arise for my consideration are as under:
(1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that in the month of October when CW.1 visited the house of the accused to meet his younger sister, the accused demanded or requested CW.1 for sexual favours and advanced involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures and thereby committed an offence punishable u/Sec.354(A) of IPC ? (2) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that the accused with an intention put CW.1 in fear of injury and thereby dishonestly induced her to give sum of Rs.20,000/- and thereby committed an offence punishable u/Sec. 384 of IPC ? (3) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that the accused insulted CW.1 and thereby provoked her intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause her to break the public peace or to commit any other offence and thereby committed an offence punishable u/Sec. 504 of IPC ? (4)Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that the accused gave life threat to CW.1 and thereby committed an offence punishable u/Sec.506 of IPC ?
(5)What order ?7 CC No.13175/2020
7. My findings to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 to 4 : In the Negative, Point No.5 : As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
8. Point No.1 to 4 : These four points are taken together for common discussion as they are arising out of same incident and interlinked with each other and also to avoid repetition of evidence.
9. The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined in all three witnesses as PW.1 to PW.3 and got marked 5 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5. PW.1 is the victim and she is the daughter of PW.2 and PW.3. PW.1 to PW.3 have turned hostile to the prosecution case by deposing that no incident was taken place between PW.1 and the accused. Further they have deposed that no complaint was lodged against the accused. PW.2 and 8 CC No.13175/2020 PW.3 have specifically deposed that they did not give any statement before the police in this regard. They have also deposed that they did not know contents of Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5. The learned Sr.APP has treated PW.1 to PW.3 as a hostile witnesses and cross-examined them. But nothing worth has been elicited from them in support of the prosecution case. In their cross-examination they have admitted that they compromised the case with the accused. Hence, the other witnesses are not examined as it would not serve any purpose. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, I answer Point No.1 to 4 in the negative.
10. Point No.5: For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., 9 CC No.13175/2020 accused is hereby acquitted of the offences punishable u/Sec.354(A), 384, 504 and 506 of IPC.
The bail bond of accused stands cancelled. (Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, corrected directly on computer and then pronounced by me in open court on this the 23 rd day of May 2022).
(Arun Sadashiv Gudigenavar) IX Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:
PW.1: Reshma PW.2: Vinoda PW.3: Rajegowda.
List of documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:
Ex.P.1 : Complaint
Ex.P.1(a): Signature of PW.1
Ex.P.2: Panchanama
Ex.P.2(a): Signature of PW.1
Ex.P.3 to 5 : Statements of PW.1 to 3.
10 CC No.13175/2020
List of material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:
- NIL -
List of witnesses examined on behalf of the defence:
- NIL -
List of documents and materials marked on behalf of the defence:
- NIL -
IX ADDL.C.M.M. Bengaluru.11 CC No.13175/2020
Judgment pronounced in the Open Court (Vide separate order) ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused is hereby acquitted of the offences punishable u/Sec.354(A), 384, 504 and 506 of IPC.
The bail bond of accused stands cancelled.
IX ACMM, Bengaluru.