Bangalore District Court
State By Bmtf Ps vs No on 30 December, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE IV ADDL. CMM, BANGALORE
Dated this the 30th day of December 2015
Present : Sri. Venkataraman Bhat,
B.Sc., LL.B. (Spl)
IV Addl. CMM, Bangalore.
JUDGMENT U/S. 355 CR.P.C.,
1. Sl. No. of the case : CC No. 15492/2008
2. The date of commission
of the offence : 3.12.1993 to 30.11.1994
3. Name of the complainant : State by BMTF PS
4. Name of the accused : A6: Sarojamma, 36 Yrs.,
W/o Mutyalappa,
A9: Govindamma, 36 Yrs.,
W/o Mutyala
A6 & A9 are residing at
No.522, 1st main road,
Venkataswamy Garden,
Jagajeevanaramanagara,
Bengaluru.
A1: T.Venkatachalaiah
A2: T.Thammaiah
A3: Rangalakshmi
A5: Mutyalappa
A8: Lakshmi
(Dead)
A4: N.R.Babu
A7: Mariga
(Split up)
5. The offences complained : U/s.409, 468, 471, 120(B) IPC
or proved
2 CC.NO.15492/2008
6. Plea of the accused
and his examination : Pleaded not guilty
7. Final order : Acquitted
8. Date of order : 30.12.2015
Superintendent of Police, BMTF (Bangalore Metropolitan Task
Force) placed charge sheet against accused No.1 to 9 for the
offences punishable u/s.409, 468, 471, 120(B) of IPC.
2. According to the prosecution, accused No1. And 2 were
working as Second Division Clerks in BBMP office - Pension section
between 16.10.1993 to 4.9.1995. Accused No.4 to 9 were working
as Civic Employees of BBMP. Accused No.3 is the wife of accused
No.1. It is alleged that, accused No.1 to 9 hatched a conspiracy
and forged the documents and prepared the list of pensioners
including accused No.4 to 9 who were in service. It is further
alleged that, accused No.1 and 2 with the help of accused No.4 to 9
had opened various accounts in the name of pensioners and
obtained the amount. It is further alleged that, instead of
computer sheet containing pensioner, accused No.1 and 2 prepared
additional list by writing separately and obtained the signatures of
Accounts Officers and withdrawn the amount. It is further alleged
that, accused No.4 and 5 induced CW35 to 38 to get oldage pension
and opened accounts in the bank and withdrawn the amount.
Totally a sum of Rs.40,71,413/- has been misappropriated. As far
as this case is concerned, a sum of Rs.16,82,086/- has been
misappropriated between 03.12.1993 to 30.11.1994.
3 CC.NO.15492/2008
3. On the basis of first information statement lodged by CW1-
Commissioner, BBMP, FIR has been registered at Crime
No.431/1995 of Halasurugate police station.
4. During the course of investigation accused No.1 to 9 had
obtained anticipatory bail and appeared before this court. They
were enlarged on bail.
5. After submission of the charge sheet, cognizance of the
offences have been taken. Copy of charge sheet was furnished as
required u/s.207 of Cr.P.C. During the pendency of the case
accused No.1, 2, 3, 5 and 8 reported to be dead and case against
these accused stands abated. Case against accused No.4 and 7
came to be split up and ordered to register as separate case.
Charge was framed u/s.409, 468, 471, 120(B) of IPC. Accused
No.6 & 9 pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6. CW1 to CW56 witnesses have been cited in the charge sheet.
During the course of trial, PW1 and PW2 were examined and Ex.P.1
to Ex.P.2(a) got marked.
7. After closure of the prosecution side evidence, statement of
accused No.6 and 9 was recorded u/s.313 of Cr.P.C. Accused No.6
and 9 did not adduce any defence evidence.
8. Heard arguments of Senior APP and advocate for the accused.
9. CW1 was examined as PW1. PW1 was working as then
Commissioner, BBMP, Bangalore. It discloses that, accused No.1
and 2 were working as Second Division Clerks in BBMP - Pension
4 CC.NO.15492/2008
section. According to PW1 he received a phone call from Manager,
Malleshwaram Co-operative Bank on 4.9.1995 and he was told that
the list of pensioners submitted by office of BBMP contained some
hand written additional names along with regular computerised
list. On enquiry it came to know that the names of one
T.Venkatachalaiah and Smt.Rangalakshmi had been inserted as
pensioners though they were not entitled for the pension. On the
basis of these entries a sum of Rs.3,78,525/- was credited to their
accounts. Except this, PW1 did not speak anything regarding other
details of the complaint. Original complaint is marked as Ex.P.1.
10. CW2 was examined as PW2. PW2 was working as Assistant
Revenue Officer in BBMP at the relevant point of time. PW2 is one
of the signatory to the mahazar marked as Ex.P.2. According to
PW2 some pass books of different banks, challans, one register
document in the name of Sarojamma came to be seized by BMTF
police. Except this, PW2 is unable to say other details.
11. Original complaint and mahazar got marked in CC
No.6189/2004.
12. Now the question for consideration is, whether prosecution is
able to prove the alleged charges against the accused beyond
reasonable doubt. It can be noticed that, accused No.1 and 2 are
the main accused in this case. Accused No.1, 2, 3, 5 and 8 were
reported to be dead. Case against accused No.1, 2, 3, 5 and 8
stands abated. PW1 did not speak anything against accused No.6
and 9. In fact during the course of cross-examination PW1
admitted as under :
5 CC.NO.15492/2008
" I have not verified the names of accused
No.4, 6, 7 and 9."
Apart from this, PW1 has further admitted as under:
"I do not know whether these accused are
not at all connected to this case."
13. PW1 being then Commissioner of BBMP is not aware the
involvement of accused No.6 and 9 in this case. Originally
complaint came to be filed before Halasurugate police station and
same was registered at Crime No.431/1995. Thereafter after
establishment of BMTF this case was referred for investigation to
this police station. During the course of investigation several
documents came to be seized under different PFs. During the
course of trial notice was issued to produce the seized original
documents. Sub Inspector of Police, BMTF police station by his
reply dated 11.2.2015 informed to the effect that, all the seized
documents were burnt in the fire mishap / accident which has
taken place in the 3rd floor of Annex building, BBMP, Bangalore
wherein office of BMTF police station is situated. In this regard
complaint was lodged and FIR has been registered at Crime
No.293/2011 u/s.436 of IPC. Under these circumstances, all the
seized documents were not produced before the court at the time of
the trial. No attempt has been made to adduce secondary evidence
by the prosecution.
14. There are more than 55 witnesses in the charge sheet. This
court issued summons to all the charge sheet witnesses. But SS
unserved on most of the witnesses. It is reported that, most of the
6 CC.NO.15492/2008
witnesses left their earlier address and their present address is not
known. It discloses that, handwriting expert opinion has been
obtained by Investigation Officer to prove the forgery of the
accused. Inspite of issuance of summons, handwriting expert did
not turn up to give evidence before the court. When original
documents are not placed before the court, it cannot be held that
prosecution proved the alleged charges. Main accused No.1 and 2
already reported to be dead. There is no acceptable and convincing
evidence against accused No.6 and 9 to prove that they hatched a
conspiracy along with other accused and forged the documents.
Necessary ingredients of offence of criminal breach of trust i.e.
entrustment with the property and dishonest misappropriation of
the property are not proved by the prosecution. Likewise forgery
committed by the accused is not proved by adducing cogent
evidence. Accused No.6 and 9 cannot be convicted merely on the
basis of opinion formed by the investigation officer in the charge
sheet. Even the prosecution could not able to secure the presence
of Investigation Officer. Evidence of PW1 is totally silent as against
accused No.6 and 9. Alleged misappropriation by the accused is
not proved. Under these circumstances there is no alternative
except to acquit accused No.6 and 9 for want of evidence. In the
result, I proceed to pass the following :
ORDER
Accused No.6 & 9 are not found guilty for the offences punishable u/s.409, 468, 471, 120(B) of IPC.
7 CC.NO.15492/2008Accused No.6 & 9 are acquitted u/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable u/s.409, 468, 471, 120(B) of IPC.
Bail bond of accused stands cancelled. Keep the entire records of this case in split up case against accused No.4 & 7. (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court on this the 30th Day of December 2015) (Venkataraman Bhat) IV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for prosecution:-
PW.1 : G.Raju Premkumar PW.2 : G.Linganna
List of exhibits marked for prosecution:-
Ex.P.1 : Complaint Ex.P.2 : Spot Mahazar
List of M.Os marked for prosecution:- Nil List of witnesses and exhibits marked on behalf of the accused:-
Nil.
(Venkataraman Bhat) IV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.8 CC.NO.15492/2008
30.12.2015 State by Sr. APP Accused Judgment ORDER (Pronounced in open court vide separate order) Accused No.6 & 9 are not found guilty for the offences punishable u/s.409, 468, 471, 120(B) of IPC.
Accused No.6 & 9 are acquitted u/s.248(1) of Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable u/s.409, 468, 471, 120(B) of IPC.
Bail bond of accused stands cancelled. Keep the entire records of this case in split up case against accused No.4 & 7. (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court on this the 30th Day of December 2015) (Venkataraman Bhat) IV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.