Bangalore District Court
State By vs R.Shabrish S/O.Ramakrishna on 16 April, 2021
IN THE COURT OF THE X ADDL.C.M.M.
MAYO HALL UNIT, AT BENGALURU
Dated: This the 16th day of April 2021
PRESENT: Smt.ARATI B.KAMATE
B.A., LL.B.,
X Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bengaluru City.
C.C.No.54196/2014
Complainant - State by, Police Sub Inspector
J.B.Nagar Police Station
/vs/
Accused 1. R.Shabrish S/o.Ramakrishna, 24 yrs.
2. R.Manjunath So.Ramakrishna, 22 yrs.
Both r/o.No.123, Muneshwara Temple
Street, Kodihalli, Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
1. The P.S.I of J.B.Nagar police station has filed this chargesheet against the accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable u/S.341, 323, 324, 504 of IPC.
2. It is the case of prosecution that on 11/12/2013 at about 11.50 AM when CWs.1 and 2 were sleeping near building in No.124, Muneshwara Temple Street, HAL III Stage, Kodihalli, Bengaluru, the accused persons were capturing the photograph of the building through window. When CW.2 questioned the same, A.1 assaulted 2 CC No.54196/2014 CW.2 with Wooden piece over his hands and legs voluntarily causing simple injury to him and A.2 assaulted him by hands. When CW.1 came to the rescue of CW.2, A.1 dragged her saree and assaulted by holding her tuft and thereby tried to outrage her modesty. The accused also abused them in filthy language. Hence, it is alleged that accused have committed the alleged offences.
3. On the basis of the FIS lodged by the informant, case was registered against the accused in J.B.Nagar P.S., Cr.No.416/2013 and FIR was submitted to the court. On completion of investigation chargesheet has been filed against the accused Nos.1 and 2 for the alleged offences.
4. Cognizance of offence was taken and summons was issued to the accused Nos.1 and 2. They appeared through their counsel and they are on bail. Copies of chargesheet were furnished to accused u/S.207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, charge was framed against the accused for the offences punishable u/S. 324, 323, 504, 354 r/w.34 of IPC. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. The prosecution in support of its case has examined 6 witnesses as PWs.1 to 6 and got marked 3 documents as Exs.P1 to P3 and also got identified Stick as M.O.1. The statement of the accused was 3 CC No.54196/2014 recorded u/S.313 of Cr.P.C. They denied the incriminating materials available against them. They did not lead any evidence.
6. Heard the arguments of Sr.APP appearing for the state and the counsel for accused and perused the records.
7. The following points arise for determination:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on 11/12/2013 at about 11.50 AM at No.124, Muneshwara Temple Street, HAL III Stage, Kodihalli, Bengaluru when CWs.1 and 2 were sleeping in the building you accused persons were capturing the photograph of the building through window and when CW.2 questioned, in furtherance of common intention you A.1 assaulted CW.2 with Wooden piece over his hands and legs voluntarily causing simple injury to him.
And thereby committed an offence punishable u/S.324 r/w.34 of the IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on the above said date, time and place in furtherance of common intention you A.2 assaulted CW.2 with hands and when CW.1 came to the rescue of CW.2, you A.1 assaulted CW.1 with hands and thus voluntarily causing hurt to them. And thereby committed an offences punishable u/S.323 r/w.34 of the IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on the above said date, time and place in furtherance of common intention you abused them in filthy language. And thereby committed an offences punishable u/S.504 r/w.34 of the IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond doubt that on the above said date, time and place in 4 CC No.54196/2014 furtherance of common intention you A1 dragged CW.1 by holding saree and tuft and thus tried to outrage her modesty. And thereby committed an offence punishable u/S.354 r/w.34 of the IPC?
5. What order?
8. The above points are answered in the following manner;
Point Nos.1 to 4 - Negative, Point No.5 - As per final order, for the following;
REASONS
9. POINTS NOS.1 to 4:- Since these points are inter-linked with each other, they have been taken together for consideration in order to avoid repetition.
10. It is the case of the prosecution is that the accused No.1 assaulted CW.2 with Wooden piece voluntarily causing simple injury, A.2 assaulted CWs.1 and 2 with hands causing hurt. They abused CW1 and 2 in filthy language. A1 tried to outrage the modesty of CW.1. The prosecution has examined the witnesses as PWs.1 to 6. PW.1 in her evidence she deposed that on 11-12-2013 when her husband and she were at home, the accused were capturing the photo of her house with their camera. When they questioned the same, the accused persons dragged her by holding her saree and assaulted by 5 CC No.54196/2014 hands. When husband came to rescue they assaulted him with wooden piece over his hands and legs. In that regard she lodged FIS as per Ex.P1. She further deposed that police came to spot and conducted mahazar as per Ex.P2 and seized the wooden piece marked at M.O.1.
11. PW.2 has stated that on 11/12/2013 the accused persons were capturing the photos of their house with their camera and when they questioned the same, the accused persons dragged saree of his wife and also assaulted her by hands. He further stated that when he went to rescue they assaulted him with wooden piece over his hands and legs. In that regard his wife and he lodged FIS as per Ex.P1 and took treatment at Chinmaya Hospital.
12. PW.3 and PW.4 deposed that police have not conducted any mahazar in their presence. They showed ignorance about this case. They further stated that they have not given statement before the police.
13. PW.5 is the medical officer. He deposed regarding treatment given to PW.2 and issuance of wound certificate as per Ex.P3. He has stated that injury mentioned in Ex.P3 might be sustained if assault is made with wooden piece.
6 CC No.54196/2014
14. PW.6 is the I.O. He deposed regarding his officials acts during investigation. After receipt of FIS from PWs.1 and 2 on 11/12/2013 at 3.15 PM he registered Cr.No.416/2013. He drew up mahazar in presence of witnesses and seized M.O.1. He recorded statements of CWs.2 to 4. He secured the wound certificate of PW.2. He filed chargesheet after completion of investigation.
15. PWs.1 and 2 have not stated specifically regarding the acts alleged to have been committed by each of the accused. As per the case of prosecution an assault was made on CW2 and when PW1 went to rescue, the accused No.1 assaulted her and tried to outrage her modesty. But during evidence they have stated that the accused assaulted and tried to outrage modesty of PW1 and when PW2 went to rescue, they assaulted him.
16. PWs.1 and 2 during cross examination have admitted regarding pendency of civil suits between the accused and themselves. They have also admitted that the accused are their relatives. They have denied that no treatment was taken for the injuries sustained by them in the alleged incident. In Ex.P.1 it is stated that there was no necessity for them to take treatment. FIS was lodged on 11-12-2013 at 3.15 pm. As per the evidence of the medical officer and Ex.P.4 PW2 7 CC No.54196/2014 had been to hospital at 2.45 pm. PW5 has stated that injured was brought by the police. The IO PW6 states that after receipt of FIS at 3.15 pm he registered FIR and then sent the injured to the hospital for treatment. There is inconsistency in the evidence regarding the time. If PW2 had been to the hospital after lodging FIS, it was not possible for him to reach hospital at 2.45 pm. It is not the case of prosecution that after taking treatment he had gone to the police station. During evidence PWs.1 and 2 have stated that accused assaulted PW.2 on hands and legs. PW2 has stated that he sustained injuries to his hands and legs. But the evidence of medical officer and Ex.P4 reveal that he sustained tenderness with swelling over left thigh. There is no mention regarding any injury to the hands of PW.2. The medical officer has also given two opinions regarding cause of injury. He states that it might be sustained due to assault with wooden piece and also due to fall from stair case.
17. The I.O. has stated that he drew up mahazar in presence of the witnesses and seized M.O.1. But the mahazar witnesses PWs.3 and 4 deposed contrary version. They were turned hostile. Inspite of cross examination nothing was elicited from their mouth in support of the prosecution case. The I.O. has stated that he has recorded statements 8 CC No.54196/2014 of CWs.2 to 4. But CW.3/PW.3 during his evidence has stated that he has not given any statement before the police. During cross examination by the learned Sr.APP he has denied that he has given statement as per Ex.P3. PWs.3 and 4 have also denied that the mahazar was conducted as per Ex.P3 and M.O.1 was seized in their presence.
18. The prosecution has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Perusal of the materials on record creates a doubt regarding happening of alleged incident itself. There is inconsistency in the evidence of prosecution witnesses as argued by the learned counsel for the accused. After considering the materials on record, if two views are possible in such circumstance, the one which is favourable to the accused be considered. If any doubt arises, the benefit of the same should go to the accused persons. The facts and circumstances revealing from the evidence by itself are sufficient to extend benefit of doubt to the accused. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused to the hilt. Hence, Points No.1 to 4 are answered in the Negative.
19. POINT NO.5:
For the afore said reasons, the following order is passed;9 CC No.54196/2014
ORDER Acting u/S.248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused Nos.1 and 2 are acquitted of the offences punishable u/S, 323, 324, 504, 354 r/w.34 of IPC. Bail bonds of accused persons stand cancelled. (Dictated to the Steno directly on computer, typed by him, same was corrected by me on computer and then pronounced in open court on this the 16th day of April 2021).
(ARATI B.KAMATE) X A.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED
Prosecution Defence
PW.1 Smt.Chandramma Nil
PW.2 Chandrappa.
PW.3 Babu.
PW.4 Ramu.
PW.5 Dr.Murali Kumar.
PW.6 Venkataswamy.
Exhibits Marked
Ex.P1 FIS.
Ex.P1(a)Signature of PW.1.
Ex.P1(b)Signature of PW.2.
Ex.P2 Mahazar.
Ex.P2(a)Signature of PW.1.
Ex.P2(b)Signature of PW.3.
Ex.P2(c)Signature of PW.4.
Ex.P3 Statement of PW.3.
Material Objects got marked
M.O.1 Stick.
X A.C.M.M., Bengaluru.
10 CC No.54196/2014