Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

State By Rajagopalnagar Police Station vs Pavan @ Pappareddy on 13 March, 2023

 KABC030709762015




   IN THE COURT OF VII ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITIAN
             MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.

          Dated this the 13th day of March, 2023

           Present :        Sri.Umesha H.K. B.A.LLB.,
                            VII Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru.

               JUDGMENT U/s 355 OF Cr.P.C.

                         C.C.No.25274/2015

 Complainant         :    State by Rajagopalnagar Police Station.
                          (By Sr.Asst.Public Prosecutor)


                            V/s

Accused          :       Pavan @ Pappareddy
                         S/o Ravishankar,
                         Aged about 24 years,
                         R/at No.02, 1st Main, Near Mandan
                         Garments,    Opp.Sathyashiva    Kalyana
                         Mantapa, Preethinagar, Laggere,
                         Bengaluru.
Date of occurrence of offence             01.08.2015
Date of report of offence                 01.08.2015
Name of the Complainant                   Sri.T.Narasimhaiah
Date of commencement of                   21.09.2022
recording evidence
                     2                 C.C.No.25274/2015




Date of closing of evidence          21.09.2022
Offences complained of               U/s 229 (A) of I.P.C.
Opinion of the Judge                 Accused found not guilty.



      CW­3 P.S.I. of Rajagopalnagar Police Station has
 filed charge sheet against the accused       for the offence
 punishable U/s 229 (A) of I.P.C.

    2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as under :

      It is alleged in the chargesheet that within the

 jurisdiction of Rajagopalnagar P.S, present accused

 being the    accused in S.C.No.975/2013, on the file of

 (CCH.66) Court, for the offences punishable U/s 399,

 402 I.P.C, remained absent, in the said case on

 25.02.2015,    31.03.2015,     22.04.2015,     03.06.2015,

 01.07.2015 and 05.08.2015 and absconded, failed to

 appear in the Court without any sufficient cause and

 thereby committed offence punishable U/s 229 (A) of

 I.P.C.

      3.     Upon the written information given by the

 Complainant     Crime    was    registered    in     Crime
                       3               C.C.No.25274/2015




No.483/2015, dated 01.08.2015 and investigation was

taken up. After the completion of the investigation, the

charge­sheet was submitted against the accused            for

the aforementioned offences.

     4.    This Court by perusing the chargesheet

materials acting U/s 190 (1) (b) of Cr.P.C, has taken

cognizance for the offences U/s 229 (A) of I.P.C, and

registered the case as CC and issued summons to

the accused.

     5.    Accused        secured under Body warrant and

Plea was read over, to which he pleaded not guilty and

claims to be tried.

     6.    The prosecution has examined P.W.1 and 2

who are Police Officials and got marked Ex.P.1 on its

behalf.   CW­3 remained absent, hence his evidenceis

dropped. Thereafter, Statement of accused U/s 313 of

Cr.P.C is recorded. Accused denied the incriminating

circumstances appeared against him and he has not
                     4                     C.C.No.25274/2015




adduced any oral or documentary evidence on his

behalf.

     7.     Heard       the   arguments.         Perused      the
documents placed on record.

     8.     The points that arise for consideration are :

          1. Whether the prosecution has proved
          beyond all reasonable doubt that
          accused has committed the offences
          U/s 229 (A) of I.P.C ?


          2. What order ?

    9. The above points are answered as under :
     Point No.1: In the Negative.
     Point No.2: As per final order for the following :


                        REASONS


     10. Point No.1 :         It     is   alleged     in      the

chargesheet that present accused present accused

being the     accused in S.C.No.975/2013, on the file of

(CCH.66) Court, for the offences punishable U/s 399,

402 I.P.C, remained absent, in the said case on

25.02.2015,     31.03.2015,        22.04.2015,     03.06.2015,
                   5                C.C.No.25274/2015




01.07.2015 and 05.08.2015 and absconded, failed to

appear in the Court without any sufficient cause and

thereby committed offence punishable U/s 229 (A) of

I.P.C.

     11.   The Prosecution in order to bring home the

guilt of the accused   has examined PW­1 and 2 and

got marked Ex.P­1. PW­1      and 2 are the       Police

Officials have deposed before the Court that on

09.07.2015 they have been deputed to trace out the

accused     in    in    Crime     No.638/2012      and

SC.No.975/2013 and they submitted report to the I.O,

stating that accused absconded etc. On behalf of

prosecution Ex.P­1 i.e., report submitted by PW­1 is

marked.

     12.   I have carefully perused the evidence placed

by prosecution. No doubt PW­1 and 2 have supported

the case of prosecution. But, they have not stated

where they have searched the accused on which date

they visited the house of accused and where they have
                    6                C.C.No.25274/2015




enquired about the presence of accused among

neighbours of accused, simply, PW­1 has given a

report stating that they had been to patrolling duty at

Laggere, Bengaluru etc., and he submitted report

stating that   accused is absconded. Further, there is

no evidence to show that PW­1 and 2 were deputed to

that duty and no documentary evidence is placed that

PW­1 and 2 were on duty as on 09.07.2015.       So, this

Court is of the opinion that the evidence placed by

prosecution is not     sufficient to come to conclusion

that accused willfully and without any sufficient cause

absconded or failed to appear before the Court. No

such evidence is placed by prosecution.

     13.   Further, for the reasons best known to the

I.O, he remained absent and he did not turn up for

evidence. Considering all these facts this Court is of

the opinion that Prosecution not proved the guilt of the

accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, by
                          7                      C.C.No.25274/2015




extending benefit of doubt, I answer Point No.1 in the

Negative.

       14. Point No.2 : In view of the discussion made

above accused found not guilty and hence I proceed to

pass the following :

                              ORDER

Acting U/s 255 (2) of Cr.P.C. the accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable U/s 229(A) of I.P.C.

Office is hereby directed to intimate the Jail authority to release the accused forth­with, in this case, if he is not required in any other case.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript computerized by him, revised, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this 13th day of March, 2023).

( UMESHA H.K.) VII Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru.

8 C.C.No.25274/2015

ANNEXURES List of witnesses examined for the Complainant :

PW.1        : Muniraju,
PW.2        : Prakash.


List of documents marked for the Complainant :

Ex.P.1      : Submission.

List of witnesses examined for the   Accused       :    NIL.

List of documents exhibited for the Accused        :   NIL.

List of Material Object marked for Prosecution :       NIL.




VII Addl.C.M.M.,Bengaluru.

9 C.C.No.25274/2015 10 C.C.No.25274/2015