Bangalore District Court
State By Indiranagar vs Suresh on 3 February, 2020
IN THE COURT OF THE LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-64) AT BENGALURU.
Dated this Monday the 3rd day of February 2020
P R E S E N T :- Sri. B.VENKATESHA B.Sc., LL.B.,
LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU CITY.
SC.No.664/2013
Complainant : State by Indiranagar
Police Station, Bangalore.
(By Public Prosecutor)
-V/s-
Accused : 1. Suresh, S/o Srinivasan,
Aged 36 years,
R/at No.D-95, ITC Colony,
Cox Town, Jeevanahalli,
Bengaluru. (Dead)
2. Jayaram, S/o Chinnappa,
Aged 46 years,
R/at No.27, Muddappa Garden,
Jeevanahalli, Bengaluru.
3. Nagaraj, S/o Chenchalaiah,
Aged 35 years,
No.74, Chinnappa Garden,
Cox Town, Jeevanahalli,
Bengaluru.
4. Saloman, S/o Venu,
Aged 30 years,
No.D-44, ITC Colony,
Cox Town, Jeevanahalli,
Bengaluru.
5. Mahendra, S/o Lakshmaiah,
Aged 21 years,
No.54, Cox Town,
Jeevanahalli, Bengaluru.
(By Sri. Mahantaraju Adv.,)
2
SC.664/2013
1. Date of commission of offence : 07.01.2012
2. Date of report of offence : 07.01.2012
3. Arrest of Accused No.1 to : 07.01.2012
4. Name of the complainant : Dr.C.J. Ramachandraiah
5. Date of commencement of
recording the evidence : 20.08.2015
6. Date of closing of evidence : 06.08.2019
7. Offences complained of : U/Secs.341, 323, 324,
354, 307, 504, 506 r/w 149 of
IPC & Sec.2 of K.P.D.P. Act
8. Opinion of the Judge : Accused No.1 to 5 are
found not guilty.
JUDGMENT
Police Sub-Inspector of Indiranagar Police Station, filed this charge sheet against accused No.1 to 5 alleging that they have committed the offences punishable U/Secs.341, 323, 324, 354, 307, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC & Sec.2 K.P.D.P. Act
2. The prosecution's case in brief is that, on 07.01.2012, at about 11.00 a.m at Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Bengaluru, accused No.1 to 5 made galata with the doctors and staff of the said hospital alleging that they have not given proper treatment to one Babu who was admitted to the said hospital for treatment on the 3 SC.664/2013 previous night of the date of alleged incident and because of that he died. Accused No.2 has assaulted to CW.1 with battery on his head and caused bleeding injury and that the accused also have assaulted CW.6 Dhanajaya and CW.7 Shanti with hands and helmets. They also have dragged CW-7 by holding her hands. The accused have abused them in filthy language and that they have thrown tables and chairs of the hospital. Hence, the charge sheet.
3. After registration of this case, the then PSI., of complainant police station has got arrested accused No.1 to 5 and produced them before the Court of X ACMM Bangalore. Accused No.1 to 5 were remanded to judicial custody and they were released on bail. After submission of the charge sheet, the learned X A.C.M.M., Bangalore, has committed this case to the Sessions Court for trial. After made over of this case to this Court for trial, the presence of accused No.1 to 5 has been secured. This Court has enlarged the accused No.1 to 5 on bail. 4
SC.664/2013
4. After hearing the arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the accused No.1 to 5, this Court has framed charges against the aforesaid accused persons for the aforesaid offences. It was read over and explained to them in Kannada language. The aforesaid accused No.1 to 5 have pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.During trial, A-1 reported as dead on 17-12-2016. Hence as per order dated 13-02-2017, this case as against A-1 stands as abated.
5. The prosecution has got examined CW.2, CW.4, CW.3, CW.5, CW.8, CW.6, CW.10, CW.1 and CW.14 as PW's 1 to PW.9 respectively and one more witness is examined as PW.10. The prosecution has got marked 13 documents and three objects as Ex's.P.1 to Ex.P.13 and MO.1 to 3 respectively.
6. Thereafter, the statement U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C, of the aforesaid accused persons No 2 to 5 has been recorded. The aforesaid accused persons have denied the incriminating evidence that appeared against them. They 5 SC.664/2013 have submitted no defense evidence.
7. Heard the arguments of the learned Public Prosecutor for prosecution and the learned counsel appeared for the accused No.1 to 5.
8. Perused the charge sheet, charges framed and the evidence placed before the Court.
9. The points that arise for my consideration are as follows :
Point No.1: Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.1 to 5 in furtherance of common intention to kill CW.1 - Dr.C.G.Ramachandraiah, at Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, Bangalore, on the aforesaid date and time a place lies within the jurisdictional limits of complainant police station, have wrongfully restrained CW.1 and thereby committed the offence punishable U/Secs.341 r/w 149 of IPC ?
Point No.2: Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.1 to 5 on above said date, time and place of offence, in collusion with each other and in furtherance of their common intention to kill CW.1 - Dr.C.G.Ramachandraiah, A-1 with his hands have assaulted to CW.1 and CW.7 and thereby committed the offence punishable U/Secs.323 r/w 149 of IPC ?
Point No.3: Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.5 along with other accused persons on above said date, time and place of offence, in collusion with each other and in 6 SC.664/2013 furtherance of their common intention to kill CW.1 have assaulted to CW.7 Shanthi Venkatesh with helmet and thereby have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.324 r/w 149 ?
Point No.4: Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.1 to 5 on above said date, time and place of offence, in collusion with each other and in furtherance of their common intention to kill CW.1, they have dragged CW.7 Shanthi by holding her hands and have insulted her and thereby committed the offence punishable U/Secs.354 r/w 149 of IPC ?
Point No.5: Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.1 to 5 on above said date, time and place of offence, in collusion with each other and in furtherance of their common intention to kill CW.1 - Dr.C.G.Ramachandraiah, A-1 with the help of battery has assaulted over the head of CW.1 Dr.C.G.Ramachandraiah and have attempted to kill him and thereby committed the offence punishable U/Secs.307 r/w 149 of IPC ?
Point No.6: Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.1 to 5 on above said date, time and place of offence, in collusion with each other and in furtherance of their common intention to kill CW.1 - Dr.C.G.Ramachandraiah, all have abused CW.1 in filthy language and thereby committed the offences punishable U/Secs.504 r/w 149 of IPC ?
Point No.7: Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.1 to 5 on above said date, time and place of offence, in collusion with each other and in furtherance of their common intention to kill CW.1 - Dr.C.G.Ramachandraiah, the accused have put criminal intimidation to 7 SC.664/2013 CW.1, CW.6 and CW.7 by saying that they will kill them and thereby committed the offence punishable U/Secs.506 r/w 149 of IPC ?
Point No.8: Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, accused No.1 to 5 on above said date, time and place of offence, in collusion with each other and in furtherance of their common intention to kill CW.1 - Dr.C.G.Ramachandraiah, the accused have damaged the chairs and other furnitures of the said hospital by way of throwing them and thereby committed the offence punishable U/Secs.2 of K.P.D.P. Act?
Point No.9: What order ?
[
10. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1 to 8 : As In the Negative Point No.9 : As per final order for the following:
REASONS
11. Points No.1 to 8 :- These points are interlinked with each other. Therefore, these points are taken up together for joint discussion to avoid repetition of facts. This case was registered on 07.01.2012 in Cr.No.10/2012 of complainant police station based on the complaint submitted as per Ex.P.10 by Dr.C.G.Ramachandraiah, R.M.O, of Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, 8 SC.664/2013 Bangalore. Ex.P.10 discloses that, on 07.01.2012 at about 11.00 a.m when he was on duty in the said hospital, he heard galata sound from Casualty Section of his hospital. Thereafter, he came out of his office and saw people crowded there and he went to the casualty section of his hospital. Galata was taking place there at that time. He asked one person that why there was galata. At that time, one person had assaulted to his face with his hand. 10-12 people formed unlawful assembly and they were shouting. They have assaulted Dr.Murali Kumar with battery and helmet by saying that, you have not provided proper treatment to one Babu of their area and that therefore the said Babu has died. They told that they will not leave them. They have thrown the tables of the hospital. The staff of the hospital namely Marigowda & Dhananjay tried to pacify the galata. The said group of people have assaulted to them with hands and helmet. They abused the staff of his hospital in filthy language by saying as "boli makkala, sule makkala" why you are not giving proper treatment to the patient who come to the said 9 SC.664/2013 hospital. They have dragged one of his staff Shanthi Venkatesh by way of holding her hands. They have assaulted on her face with helmet. Other staff of his hospital also have received assault. Later the complainant came to know that, on 06.01.2012 at about 1.00 a.m one Babu, aged 26 years came to the said hospital for treatment with history of road traffic accident. The said Babu had sustained head injury. After giving preliminary treatment they referred the patient to other hospital for further treatment. Therefore, 10-12 people have abused the staff of his hospital and have assaulted to them. The said galata scenes have been recorded in the C.C. T.V. camera installed in the said hospital. He came to know the names of the people who have made galata as Saloman, Mahendra, Suresh, Nagaraj, Jayaram and others. Therefore, the complainant has filed complaint before the complainant police and sought to take suitable action against the said persons.
12. Ex.P.11 F.I.R discloses that after registration of the complaint marked at Ex.P.11, the then S.H.O has 10 SC.664/2013 submitted F.I.R to the 10th A.C.M.M., Mayohall, Bangalore, on the same day at about 4.40 p.m along with the complaint marked at Ex.P.10. Ex.P.12 is the photo of one auto rickshaw bearing registration No.KA-03-AA-460. Ex.P.1 spot mahazar dated 07.01.2012 discloses that, after registration of the complaint marked at Ex.P.10 in Cr.No.10/2012, the then S.H.O of the complainant police station has gone to Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, Bangalore, on the said day in between 13.05 p.m to 14.05 p.m and in the presence of panchas K.Balu and Chennakeshavalu as well in the presence of Dr.C.G.Ramachandraiah, he prepared the spot mahazar. On the same day, the I.O has received the C.D of videos that recorded in the C.C.T.V. camera of the said hospital . Ex.P.2 wound certificate of Dr.C.J.Ramachandraiah, the complainant discloses that on 07.01.2012 at about 11.15 a.m he was obtained treatment in the Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, Bengaluru, with history of assault said to have occurred on 07.01.2012 at around 10.45 a.m. The said document further discloses that, the complainant 11 SC.664/2013 Dr.C.J.Ramachandraiah had sustained contusion over both cheeks and that it is simple in nature. Ex.P.3 wound certificate of Marigowda of Chinmaya Mission Hospital, discloses that on 07.01.2012 at about 11.20 a.m he was obtained treatment in the said Hospital, with history of assault said to have occurred on 07.01.2012 at about 10.45 a.m. The said document further discloses that, the said Marigowda had sustained tenderness with contusion over the left cheek and that it is simple in nature. Ex.P.4 wound certificate of Dhananjaya, the staff of Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, Bengaluru, discloses that he also taken treatment on 07.01.2012 at about 11.15 a.m with history of assault said to have occurred on 07.01.2012 at around 10.45 a.m. The said document further discloses that, he sustained tenderness and contusion over his left cheek and that it is simple in nature. Ex.P.5 wound certificate of Shanthi Venkatesh, staff of aforesaid hospital discloses that on 07.01.2012 at about 11.20 a.m she has obtained treatment in the Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, Bengaluru, with 12 SC.664/2013 the history of assault said to have occurred on 07.01.2012 at around 10.45 a.m. The said document further discloses that she had sustained tenderness over her neck, right and left shoulders and that the said injuries are simple in nature. Ex's.P.6 and P.8, the statements of the witnesses Marigowda and Dhananjeya, the staffs of Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, Bengaluru, discloses that, they made statement before the police on 07.01.2012 by way of reiterating almost all the facts as averred in the complaint marked at Ex.P.10. Ex.P.7 seizure mahazar dated 07.01.2012 discloses that, the I.O of this case has seized the auto bearing registration No.KA-03-AA-460 in the premises of the complainant police station in connection with this case in the presence of panchas Ananthnath and Anil. The said document further discloses that the said auto was seized at the instance of accused No.1 to 5 of this case. Ex.P.9 report of Raghu, H.C.4974 of Indiranagar police station discloses that, he also made statement before the I.O stating that, he heard about occurrence of the said incident as described in Ex.P.10. At 13 SC.664/2013 that time the accused persons have attempted to escape in the said auto bearing registration No.KA-03-AA-460. Thereafter, he had caught the said persons and auto and brought them to the police station along with the auto. Ex.P.13 statement of Devendrappa, discloses that he was working as Supervisor in the Chinmaya Mission Hospital and that he was managing the C.C.T.V. work i.e., C.C.T.V. installed in the said hospital was in good condition and had capacity to take the photos and videos of the objects or persons from a distance of about 30-40 feet. He had taken training from Total Private Limited for Chinmaya Mission Hospital about management of C.C.T.V. The said document further discloses that, he has collected videos of the incident that occurred on 07.01.2012 at about 11.00 a.m in one C.D. and produced it before the I.O. of complainant police station and that the I.O has recovered the said C.D. MO.1 is steel battery torch, MO.2 is helmet and MO.3 is a sealed cover. With the background of contents of the documents Ex's.P.1 to P.13, the oral evidence of PW's.1 to PW.10 and MO's.1 to 3 placed before 14 SC.664/2013 the Court is analyzed to know whether accused No.1 to 5 have committed the offences as alleged.
13. PW.1 Bala, the staff working in the security division of the Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Bengaluru, discloses that, he has identified his signature on Ex.P.1 that marked as Ex.P.1(a). He has deposed that, there was galata between accused persons and the doctors of his hospital. At that time, they have assaulted to Dr.Murali, R.M.O and to one lady staff. After the said galata police came to the said spot and prepared mahazar as per ExP.1 and recovered one battery, helmet and C.D marked as MO's.1 to 3 respectively..
14. PW.2 Dr.Murali Kumar, Medical Officer of Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, Bengaluru, deposed that, he has seen accused No.1 to 5 of this case. Complainant Dr.C.Ramachandraiah is the R.M.O. of Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, Bengaluru. On 07.01.2012 from 8.00 a.m to 2.00 p.m he was on duty in the said hospital. On the same day at about 11.00 a.m two persons (A-2 and A-5) came to him and enquired about the treatment given 15 SC.664/2013 to Babu during previous day night. At that time, PW.2 told that he was not on duty during night time of the previous day. At that time, accused No.1 Saloman told that no proper treatment was given to Babu and his health condition is very critical and saying so accused No.1 assaulted over his cheek and nose and thereafter assaulted with battery on his head. He told that, if you are here, he will kill me and told to run away from the said place. PW.2 told him that he is unable to run due to polio attack. In spite of that, the persons who were with accused No.1 have assaulted to him with helmet. They have also assaulted to the other staff of the hospital who were on duty at out patient department. Thereafter, Dr. Ramachandraiah, R.M.O, came to the said place. 5 accused persons and others have assaulted to Dr.Ramachandraiah also. Thereafter, Indiranagar police came to the spot and took accused No.1 to 5 to the police station. He has deposed that, he has not sustained injuries. He has deposed that he has given treatment to the injured persons if his hospital namely, 16 SC.664/2013 Dr.C.J.Ramachandraiah, Marigowda, Dhananjaya and Shanthi Venkatesh and has issued wound certificates marked as per Ex's.P.2 to P.5. He has stated that, all the said 4 persons are all sustained simple injuries as mentioned in Ex's.P.2 to P.5 wound certificates.
15. PW.3 Chennakeshavalu, spot mahazar witness has deposed that, on 07.01.2012 he came to the hospital at 2.00 p.m for his duty. At that time, police have prepared Ex.P.1 spot mahazar and obtained his signature as per Ex.P.1(b) stating that galata had taken place at morning time in the said hospital. He do know the object that recovered by the police at that time.
16. PW.4 Marigowda, one of the injured witness has deposed before the Court that, he has not seen accused No.1 to 5 present before the Court. One year back on one day at about 10.30 a.m there was galata taken place near casualty section of his hospital. At that time, police came to that section 25-30 persons had gathered in the casualty section. At that time, police had taken his signature. He does not know who all have assaulted to whom. He has 17 SC.664/2013 stated that, he has not made any statement before the police.
17. PW.5 Ananthnath, ward boy of Chinmaya Mission Hospital, has deposed that, he do not remember whether he has seen accused No.1 to 5. He has put his signature on Ex.P.7 seizure mahazar as per Ex.P.7(a). During the year 2012 police called him to the police station and seized one auto-rickshaw bearing No.KA-03-AA-460 in connection with this case.
18. PW.6 Dhananjaya, another staff of Chinmaya Mission Hospital, during the course of his chief examination has deposed that, on 07.01.2012 between 10.00 a.m to 11.00 p.m there was galata in the casualty section of the said hospital. At that time he was in ECG room. In the said galata some people have assaulted to Dr.Ramachandraiah and Dr.Murali Kumar. But he do not know who are all have assaulted to said Dr.Ramachandraiah and Dr.Murali Kumar. He has deposed that, the unknown persons have assaulted to the said Dr.Ramachandraiah and Dr.Murali Kumar on the ground that, on previous day 18 SC.664/2013 they have not given proper treatment to one injured. At that time, 15-20 people were gathered there. Accused No.1 to 5 were also in the said group of people. He does not know the names of the accused persons. The said people have pushed him out of the hospital. Thereafter, he took treatment from doctor.
19. PW.7 H.S.Raghu, the then H.C.4974 of Indiranagar police station has deposed that, on 07.01.2012 at aobut 12.00 noon his P.S.I., had intimated him to go to Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, Bengaluru, by saying that galata has taken place in the said hospital. Thereafter, he along with CW.11 and CW.12 went to the said hospital. Dr.Murali Kumar was there at that time in the said hospital. He told that 5 persons came to the hospital by saying that, proper treatment is not given to their friend Babu in the said hospital and if anything happens to Babu they will not leave the doctor and they have thrown tables and chairs of the hospital and have assaulted to the staffs of the said hospital. PW.7 further deposed that, the said 5 persons were in the said hospital. When PW.7 and his staff 19 SC.664/2013 tried to caught hold them, the said 5 persons tried to escape from there in their autorickshaw. Thereafter, he and his staff caught hold them and brought them to the police station along with the auto and produced before the P.S.I along with a report. Later, he came to know the names of the said accused persons as Suresh, Nagaraju, Jayaram, Saloman and Mahendra.
20. PW.8 Dr.C.G.Ramachandraiah, the then R.M.O of Chinmaya Mission Hospital, Indiranagar, Bengaluru, has deposed before the Court that, on 07.01.2012, at about 11.00 a.m he was informed that some galata is taking place in casualty department. So he went to the casualty section of the said hospital. At that time some 4-5 persons were shouting there. One among the said persons assaulted to Dr.Muralidhar. Another persons slapped to the cheeks of PW.8 with hands. The said galata had taken place on the ground that, on 06.01.2012, during night between 11.00 p.m to 12.00 midnight the hospital authorities have not given proper treatment to one injured who was brought to the said hospital due to road traffic 20 SC.664/2013 accident. The said 5 persons have assaulted to the staff of his hospital. They also assaulted Dr.Muralidhar with battery. They have assaulted to one lady staff of their hospital. They all abused them in filthy language. He came to know the names of the said persons as Suresh and Jayramu. But he forgot the names of other persons. Thereafter, he telephoned to Indiranagar police and informed them about the incident. He went to the police station at about 1.00 p.m and lodged complaint as per Ex.P.10. Thereafter, police came to the spot and prepared spot mahazar and seized the material objects from the spot. They have taken the C.D. of the video that recorded at the time of incident. PW.8 has identified accused No.2 and 5 among accused No.1 to 5 who were present on the said date, time and place.
21. PW.9 Kempegowda, the then S.H.O of police station has deposed his evidence about the registration of the complaint as per Ex.P.10 and sending F.I.R Ex.P.11 to the X A.C.M.M., Bangalore. He has deposed about preparation of mahazar as per Ex.P.1 and recovery of 21 SC.664/2013 material objects MOs.1 to 3 in the presence of panchas on the aforesaid date, time and place. He has further deposed that he seized the auto and arrested accused No.1 to 5 on 07.01.2012. He recorded the statement of witnesses. He has further deposed that after completion of investigation he had submitted charge sheet before the X A.C.M.M., Bangalore against A-1 to 5.
22. PW.10 Devendrappa Singh, the then House Keeper of Chinmaya Mission Hospital has deposed that, during the year 2013 to 2016 he worked in the said hospital as security and C.C.T.V. operator. One day there was galata in the said hospital. The video of the said galata was recorded in the C.C.T.V camera of the said hospital. On the request of the police he has copied the said videos in C.D and gave it to the police. The said C.D is marked as MO.3. He has given letter to the police which is marked as Ex.P.13.
23. From the aforesaid evidence of PW.1, seizure of MO's.1 to 3 and preparation of spot mahazar as per Ex.P.2 does not disclose that among accused persons who are all 22 SC.664/2013 have made galata with Dr.Muralidhar and Dr Ramachandraiah as well as to other staffs of his hospital. Nothing is elicited in his cross examination that the police have not recovered the objects marked as Mos.1 to 3 in his presence. During the course of his cross examination he has deposed that, at the time of said galata there were 20-30 people gathered. He has further deposed that he do not whether the accused persons are all have present in the said group of 20-30 people. So, the presence of accused No.1 to 5 on the aforesaid date, time and place is not specifically supported by the evidence of PW.1. His evidence is also not specifically disclose that accused No.1 to 5 are all have made galata with Dr.Murali Kumar, Dr.R.G.Ramachandraiah and other staffs of the said hospital on the aforesaid date, time and place. The aforesaid evidence of PW.2 Dr.Murali Kumar supports that, he has identified the accused No.2 and 5 only and his evidence further discloses that, accused No.1 Suresh has assaulted over his cheek and nose with hands as well as with battery on his head. His evidence does not disclose 23 SC.664/2013 that, who are all have assaulted to Dr.Ramachandraiah, Marigowda, Dhananjaya, Shanthi Venkatesh and others. His evidence that recorded in his cross examination further discloses that, he do not know why the said galata was taken place. At that time 20 people were gathered there. Among them he can identify only 5 persons. So, about the alleged incident, evidence of PW.2 also is not specifically supported the case of the prosecution as alleged against accused No.1 to 5.
24. The aforesaid evidence of PW.3 Chennakeshavalu discloses that, police have obtained his signature that marked as Ex.P.1(b) on 07.01.2012 by saying that there was galata on the said date in his hospital. His evidence does not disclose that, police have recovered the objects marked as MO's.1 to 3 in his presence. His evidence further discloses that he do not know the contents of Ex.P.1 and that he has put his signature only as per say of police.
25. The evidence of PW.4 Marigowda, one of the injured according to the prosecution does not disclose 24 SC.664/2013 that, the accused or other persons are all have assauled to him. He has not identified the 25-30 people who have gathered there. So, it is clear that, evidence of PW.4 also is not specifically supports the case of the prosecution as alleged against accused No.1 to 5.
26. The evidence of PW.6 Dhananjaya, discloses that, somebody have assaulted to Dr.Ramachandraiah and Dr.Muralikumar on 07.01.2012 in between 10.00 a.m to 11.00 a.m when they were in the casualty section of the said hospital. His evidence discloses that, at the time of said galata PW.6 was in ECG room of out patient department. His evidence discloses that he do not know the persons who have assaulted to Dr.Ramachandraiah and Dr.Muralikumar. His evidence further discloses that, 15-20 people gathered there at the time of the said galata. His evidence discloses that, at that time accused No.1 to 5 were also present. But he has not deposed that accused No.1 to 5 have assaulted to Dr.Murali Kumar, Dr.Ramachandraiah and others. His evidence also does not disclose that accused No.1 to 5 have formed unlawful 25 SC.664/2013 assembly as alleged.
27. At the request of the prosecution, PW's.2, 4 and 6 are all treated as hostile witnesses and that they were subjected to cross examination on behalf of the case of the prosecution with permission. Nothing is elicited in the cross examination of PW.3 about preparation of mahazar as per Ex.P.1 and recovery of objects marked at MO's.1 to
3. Nothing is elicited that accused No.1 to 5 have made galata on the said date in connection with treatment given to Babu. Nothing is elicited in the cross examination of PW.4 Marigowda about the alleged incident that accused No.1 to 5 are all made galata and assaulted to Dr.Ramachandraiah, Dr.Murali Kumar and other staffs of the said hospital by way of abusing them in filthy language in connection with treatment given to one Babu. The evidence of PW.4 discloses that, he has not made statement as per Ex.P.2. The evidence of PW.6 that recorded during the course of cross examination for prosecution also is not supported that accused No.1 to 5 are all assaulted Dr.Muralikumar and Dr.Ramachandraiah 26 SC.664/2013 as well as other staffs by way of abusing them in filthy language with the objects marked as MO's.1 and 2. His evidence discloses that, he has not made statement to the police as per Ex.P.8. Nothing is elicited in the cross examination of PW's.3, 4 and 6 that why they. Therefore, I am of the opinion that no grounds to accept the evidence of PW's.3, 4 and 6 in support of the case of the prosecution.
28. Nothing is elicited in the cross examination of PW.5 in support of the case of the prosecution that, the I.O on the said date has seized the aforesaid auto-rickshaw. The aforesaid evidence of PW.5 is not specifically supported that accused No.1 to 5 are all assaulted to the aforesaid injured witnesses on the aforesaid date, time and place. But his evidence discloses that, he has caught accused No.1 to 5 on the said date and brought them to the police station and produced before the I.O. along with the aforesaid auto. Nothing is elicited in the cross examination of PW.7 that, he has not caught accused No.1 to 5 in the said hospital. PW.7 is not eye witness to the 27 SC.664/2013 alleged incident. The evidence of complainant Dr.Ramachandraiah as stated supra also is not specifically supported the case of the prosecution that accused No.1 to 5 have assaulted to him and Dr.Muralikumar as well as other staff on the said date, time and place. He does not know the names of the accused persons who have assaulted to him as well as to Dr.Murali Kumar and others. His evidence further discloses that, he is unable to identify accused No.1 to 5 of this case who are present before this Court. PW.8 is also treated as hostile witness and subjected to cross examination on behalf of the prosecution with permission. But, nothing is elicited in the cross examination in support of the case of the prosecution that, accused No.1 to 5 are all assaulted him, Dr.Murali Krishna and other staffs as alleged. Nothing is elicited that PW.8 has deposed a false evidence against the prosecution before this Court. So, it is clear that the evidence of PW.8 is not supported the case of the prosecution as alleged against the accused persons. Hence, evidence of PW.8 is not supported to the case of 28 SC.664/2013 the prosecution.
29. The afore stated C.D that marked as MO.3 has not been played before this Court to prove its contents. On over all perusal of the evidence placed before the Court, it is clear that the evidence of the said witnesses is not clearly supported the case of the prosecution that, on the aforesaid date, time and place accused No.1 to 5 along with others have formed unlawful assembly with an intention to kill Dr.Ramachandraiah, Dr.Murali Kumar and other staff of the said hospital in connection with the treatment given to one Babu as alleged. There is also no evidence to show before this Court that, one day prior to the alleged incident, during night time, one Babu was brought to the said hospital with a history of road traffic accident. To support this fact, case sheet is not produced. The Doctor who had given treatment to the said Babu also is not examined. Other injured staff Shanthi Venkatesh is not examined before this Court. Therefore, it is clear that the case before the court is doubtful in nature. It is clear that the evidence of PW's.1 to 10 is not reliable in support 29 SC.664/2013 of the case of the prosecution. Therefore, it is clear that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case as against the accused No.1 to 5 beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, I answer points No.1 to 8 as in the negative.
30. Point No.9: For the fore going and the findings given on points No.1 to 8, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting U/Sec.235 of Cr.P.C accused No.2 to 5 are acquitted of the offences punishable U/Secs.341, 323, 324, 354, 307, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC & Sec.2 K.P.D.P. Act.
Accused No.2 to 5 are set at liberty forthwith if they are not required in other case/s. Bail and surety bonds of accused No.1 to 5 shall stands canceled.
MO's 1 & 2 are worth less. Hence, after expiry of appeal period, destroy MO's 1 & 2. Preserve MO-3 CD.
(Typed by the Stenographer on my dictation, the transcript revised and then pronounced by me in open court on this Monday the 3rd day of February 2020).
(B.VENKATESHA) LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,(CCH-64), BENGALURU CITY.
30
SC.664/2013 ANNEXURE
1. List of witnesses examined for the prosecution:
PW.1 : Bala PW.2 : Dr. Murali Kumar PW.3 : Chennakeshavalu PW.4 : Marigowda PW.5 : Ananthanath PW.6 : Dhananjeya PW.7 : H.S. Raghu PW.8 : C.G.Ramachandraiah PW.9 : Kempegowda PW.10 : Devendrappa Singh
2. List of witnesses examined for the accused:
- NIL-
3. List of documents marked for the prosecution:
Ex.P.1 : Spot Mahazar
Ex.P.1(a) : Signature of PW.1
Ex.P.1(b) : Signature of PW.3
Ex.P.1(c) : Signature of PW.8
Ex.P.1(d) : Signature of PW.9
Ex.P.2 : Wound certificate
Ex.P.2(a) : Signature of PW.2
Ex.P.3 : Wound certificate
Ex.P.3(a) : Signature of PW.2
Ex.P.4 : Wound certificate
Ex.P.4(a) : Signature of PW.2
Ex.P.5 : Wound certificates
Ex.P.5(a) : Signature of PW.2
Ex.P.6 : Statement of PW.4
Ex.P.7 : Seizure mahazar
31
SC.664/2013
Ex.P.7(a) : Signature of PW.5
Ex.P.7(b) : Signature of PW.9
Ex.P.8 : Statement of PW.6
Ex.P.9 : Report of PW.7
Ex.P.9(a) : Signature of PW.7
Ex.P.9(a) : Signature of PW.7
Ex.P.9(b) : Signature of PW.9
Ex.P.10 : Complaint
Ex.P.10(a) : Signature of PW.8
Ex.P.10(b) : Signature of PW.9
Ex.P.11 : F.I.R
Ex.P.11(a) : Signature of PW.9
Ex.P.12 : Photo of auto
Ex.P.13 : Certificate
Ex.P.13(a) : Signature of PW.10
4. List of documents marked for the Accused:
- NIL-
5. Material objects marked in this case:
MO.1 - Steel battery
MO.2 - Helmet
MO.3 - Sealed cover.
(B.VENKATESHA)
LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, (CCH-64), BENGALURU CITY.
32
SC.664/2013
33
SC.664/2013
03.01.2020
State by - P.P.
A-1 - Dead
A-2 to 5 by - B.M.
Judgment.
Case called. Accused No.2 to 5 pre/abs.
Vide separate judgment kept in file, Judgment Pronounced as under:-
Acting U/Sec.235 of Cr.P.C., accused No.1 to 5
are acquitted of the offences punishable U/Secs.341, 323, 324, 354, 307, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC & Sec.2 K.P.D.P. Act.
Accused No.1 to 5 are set at liberty forthwith if they are not required in other case/s. Bail and surety bonds of accused No.1 to 5 shall stands canceled.
MO's 1 & 2 are worth less. Hence, after expiry of appeal period, destroy MO's 1 & 2. Preserve MO-3 CD.
(B.VENKATESHA) LXIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, (CCH-64), BENGALURU CITY.
34 SC.664/2013