Bangalore District Court
Mahadevapura Ps vs A1 Charan Alias Charan Raj on 8 May, 2025
KABC010301102018
Presented on : 30-10-2018
Registered on : 30-10-2018
Decided on : 08-05-2025
Duration : 6 years, 6 months, 9 days
IN THE COURT OF LXVI ADDL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-67)
PRESENT
SRI. JAYAPRAKASH A.
B.A.L., L.L.M.,
LXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.(CCH-67)
Dated this the 8th day of May, 2025
S.C.No. 1756/2018
COMPLAINANT : State by Mahadevapura Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(By Public Prosecutor.)
/Vs/
ACCUSED : A1. Charan @ Charan Raj,
S/o Muniyappa,
Aged about 25 years,
R/at 2nd Cross,
Near Muneshwara Temple,
Cauvery Nagar, Mahadevapura,
Bengaluru City.
A2. Lokesh @ Kodi,
S/o Ayilu,
Aged about 27 years,
R/at near Krishna Temple,
2 S.C.No.1756/2018
11th Cross, Cauvery Nagar,
Mahadevapura Post,
Bengaluru.
(By A.1 Sri.MG,_ A.2 Sri.KN
Advocates)
A3 Manja @ Manjunatha.
A4 Devaraj.
(Case against A3 and A4 split up in
CC.58719/2018)
DATE OF:
Occurrence of offence : 03/04/2018
Commencement of trial : 25/10/2021
Closing of trial : 28/05/2024
Name of the complainant: Sri.J.Ajay
Offence alleged : Under Sections 302, 307,
120-B read with
Section 34 of IPC.
Opinion of the judge : Charge leveled against the
accused are not proved.
Sentence or order : Acquitted of the offence
punishable under section
302, 307, 120-B read with
section 34 of IPC.
3 S.C.No.1756/2018
JUDGMENT
The Mahadevapura police have filed charge sheet against the accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under section 302, 307 , 120-B read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that about two years prior to the incident there was a quarrel between accused No.1 Charan @ Charan Raj and deceased Ajay. The accused was nursing grudge against the deceased in respect of the same. On 03/04/2018 at about 9:45 p.m. accused No.1 along with accused Nos.2 to 4 picked up quarrel with deceased Ajay and after the quarrel the deceased Ajay left the said place. Thereafter accused No.1 to 4 in furtherance of their common intention hatched a conspiracy to commit murder of the deceased Ajay and armed with a chopper all the four accused went in search of the deceased Ajay in a TVS Victor Motor Cycle. At 11:10 p.m. deceased Ajay was crossing the White Field main road in front of VST Tiller Company situated near BESCOM Office of Garudacharapalya, within the jurisdiction of Mahadevapura police station. On seeing the same accused No.4 stopped the bike and accused Nos. 1 to 3 got down from the bike and accused No.2 held the shirt collar of the deceased and accused No.3 pulled hair of the deceased and accused 4 S.C.No.1756/2018 No.1 assaulted on the left side of the neck, lower part of the neck and left cheek of the deceased with the chopper due to which deceased sustained bleeding injuries and fell down, thereafter they assaulted him and kicked him, CW-1 who witnessed the incident admitted the injured to the hospital. The injured while undergoing treatment in the hospital succumbed to the injuries on 13/04/2018 and thereby accused Nos.1 to 4 committed the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 307 and 302 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
3. On the basis of the complaint of CW1, Mahadevapura Police have registered a case in Crime No.144/2018 for the offence punishable under sections 302, 307, 120-B read with 34 of Indian Penal Code and took up the investigation.
4. After completion of investigation the police have filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence punishable under sections 302, 307, 120-B and 34 of IPC before the learned Magistrate. After filing of the charge sheet the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and registered the case against the accused for the above said offence.
5. The copy of charge sheet was furnished to accused Nos.1 and 2 and accused Nos.3 and 4 are absconding. Hence the 5 S.C.No.1756/2018 learned Magistrate has complied with the provisions of section 207 of Cr.P.C. As the offence charged against the accused is exclusively triable by this Court the learned Magistrate acting under section 209 of Cr.P.C has committed the case against accused Nos.1 and 2 to this Court for trial after registering split up case against accused Nos.3 and 4 in CC.58719/2018. The matter is taken up before this court for further proceedings accordingly.
6. In pursuance of summons issued by this Court accused Nos.1 and 2 appeared through their counsel and got enlarged on bail. After hearing both the parties and on considering the materials forthcoming from the prosecution papers and from the materials on record this Court has framed charge against the accused Nos.1 and 2 for The offence punishable under Section 302, 307, 120-B read with section 34 of IPC. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
7. In support of its case, prosecution cited as many as 26 witnesses in the charge sheet. The prosecution got examined 23 witnesses as PW.1 to PW.23 in support of its case. The prosecution has dropped CWs 4, 10 and 12. The prosecution has produced the documents at Ex.P1 to Ex.P39 and the properties at MO.1 to 5. After closing the evidence of prosecution witnesses accused were examined under section 6 S.C.No.1756/2018 313 of Cr.P.C. wherein they have denied all the incriminating materials appearing against them in the prosecution evidence. The accused persons neither chosen to adduce any oral evidence nor produced any documents in support of their defence.
8. Heard the arguments of learned Public Prosecutor and also learned counsel for accused. Perused the oral and documentary evidence forthcoming on record. On going through the materials the points that arise for my consideration are:
(1) Whether the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubt that accused Nos.1 and 2 along with accused Nos.3 and 4 against whom the case is split up on 03/04/2018 at about 9:45 p.m. in prosecution of their common intention, in view of old animosity with deceased came near Cauvery Nagar Arch within the jurisdiction of Mahadevapura police station conspired together to commit crime against the deceased Ajay and thereby committed the offences punishable under section 120-B read with section 34 of IPC ?
(2) Whether the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused Nos.1 and 2 along with accused Nos.3 and 4 against whom the case is split up on the said date place and time in furtherance of their common intention went on TVS Victor Motor 7 S.C.No.1756/2018 cycle in search of Ajay on White Field Main Road in front of VST Tiller Company, Beside BESCOM office, Garudacharapalya , got down from the bike and accused No.2 held tightly the shirt collar of Ajay and accused No.1 by saying today they will not leave him and will go after finishing him assaulted Ajay with iron machu on his left side neck, below the neck and left side cheek forcibly caused grievous bleeding injuries tried to murder him and there by committed an offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC?
(3) Whether the prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused Nos.1 and 2 along with accused Nos.3 and 4 against whom the case is split up on the said date place and time in furtherance of their common intention murdered the deceased Ajay by assaulting him with machu and pushing him down and assaulting him with hands and kicking with legs and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC?
(4) What order?
9. After hearing the arguments of both the parties and on considering the relevant materials on record, my findings on the above points are as hereunder.
Point No.1 to 3 : In the Negative
8 S.C.No.1756/2018
Point No.4 : As per final order
for the following;
REASONS
10. Point Nos.1 to 3: Since all these points are
interconnected they are taken up together for common discussion in order to avoid repetition of facts.
11. It is the case of the prosecution that about two years prior to the incident there was a quarrel between accused No.1 Charan @ Charan Raj and deceased Ajay. The accused was nursing grudge against the deceased in respect of the same. On 03/04/2018 at about 9:45 p.m. accused No.1 along with accused Nos.2 to 4 picked up quarrel with deceased Ajay and after the quarrel the deceased Ajay left the said place. Thereafter accused No.1 to 4 in furtherance of their common intention hatched a conspiracy to commit murder of the deceased Ajay and armed with a chopper all the four accused went in search of the deceased Ajay in a TVS Victor Motor Cycle. At 11:10 p.m. deceased Ajay was crossing the White Field main road in front of VST Tiller Company situated near BESCOM Office of Garudacharapalya, within the jurisdiction of Mahadevapura police station, on seeing the same accused No.4 stopped the bike and accused Nos. 1 to 3 got down from the bike and accused No.2 held the shirt collar of the deceased 9 S.C.No.1756/2018 and accused No.3 pulled hair of the deceased and accused No.1 assaulted on the left side of the neck, lower part of the neck and left cheek of the deceased with the chopper due to which deceased sustained bleeding injuries and fell down, thereafter they assaulted him and kicked him and the injured was admitted to the hospital by CW-1. The deceased while undergoing treatment in the hospital succumbed to the injuries on 13/04/2018.
12. In support of its case prosecution examined one G.Ajay as PW1. He is an eye witness to the incident and spot mahazar witness. During the examination in chief he has stated that the deceased died due to the assault by accused No.1 Charan with chopper. On 03/04/2018 around 11:00 p.m. he was proceeding on Deo bike on White Field main road from Singana palya towards Garudachar Palya. At that time deceased Ajay was crossing the White Field road near Udupi Park. He identified him in the street light. At that time a Victor two wheeler came from opposite direction. He saw accused Nos.1 to 4 in the said motorcycle. The deceased after crossing the road was standing on the footpath under the street light and he was parking his two wheeler near VHK Company gate in order to meet deceased Ajay. After parking the two wheeler when he turned back to move towards the deceased, he saw Lokesh holding the collar of the deceased, 10 S.C.No.1756/2018 Manjunath pulling the hair of the deceased and Charan was holding a chopper by saying that he would not leave him and assaulted him with the chopper over the left side of the neck and kicked him with leg due to which deceased fell down. Thereafter, all the four accused returned in the same two wheeler towards Singanapalya road. The deceased Ajay was severely bleeding due to the injuries. He requested a car moving on the said road for lift and with the help of the driver of the car he shifted the injured to Manipal Hospital opposite to Shanthi Nikethana. Immediately he called PW.2, over phone and informed the incident. Thereafter he lodged a complaint before the police at 2:30 a.m. as per Ex.P.1. The police visited the spot in his presence and presence of Sanjay/CW-10 and Dilip/CW-9, collected blood stained tar. He identified his signature at Ex.P.2 Mahazar. On 13/04/2018 the injured was shifted to Health Care Hospital, VV Puram from Manipal Hospital. On the same day at about 7:00 to 7:30 p.m. the injured Ajay succumbed to the injuries. On 16/04/2018 police called him to the police station and enquired him with regard to the incident. He has identified the accused Nos.1 and 2 before the Court. His examination in chief was deferred for want of properties and he was again further examined in chief. In his examination in chief dated 16/12/2021 he has stated that the chopper shown to him before the Court is not the one used for commission of offence.
11 S.C.No.1756/2018He has denied the suggestion of the learned Public Prosecutor in so for as the chopper is concerned.
13. During the cross examination by the counsel for the accused, PW-1 has given a complete go by to the case of the prosecution. He has stated that when the incident took place it was night and it was dark. He has stated that there was no source of light in the spot of incident. He has also stated that he had not seen anything in the spot of incident. He has stated that he do not know as to who has typed Ex.P.1 complaint, and he has not given anything in writing to the police. It is stated that on the request of the police he has signed the complaint. Nothing has been elicited during the cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor in so for as the recovery of weapon and the incident is concerned.
14. Smt.Nagamma is examined as PW.2. She is none other than the mother of the deceased Ajay. The prosecution examined her in order to prove the previous animosity of the accused with the deceased. During the examination in chief she has stated that on 04/04/2018 at about 11:30 p.m. when she was in the railway Station at Trichur, her second son Vijay called her over phone and stated that while deceased crossing the road in front of VST Company, Garudachar Palya, he was assaulted by somebody and shifted to Manipal Hospital.
12 S.C.No.1756/2018Immediately she came to Bengaluru and visited Manipal Hospital and found the injured in ICU. She found injuries over both shoulder of the injured and he was not in a position to talk. He was in hospital for a period of 13 days and succumbed to the injuries. She has given a complaint to the police as per Ex.P-3. She has stated that she do not know as to who murdered her son. During the cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor she has denied all the suggestions put by the learned Public Prosecutor. Nothing has been elicited during the cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor in so for as the incident and the involvement of the accused persons in the alleged offence.
15. T.Tejanarayan is examined as PW.3. He is none other than the father of the deceased Ajay. He was examined by the prosecution in order to prove previous animosity between the accused and the deceased. He has stated that around three years back, his son was murdered and he was working in the Steel Plant in Kerala. He immediately went to the hospital and found that the injured had sustained injuries over head, hands, legs and he was in ICU. He heard that injured sustained injuries in a quarrel between some boys. He has stated that police visited mortuary inspected the dead body and took his signature. When he was cross examined by the learned Public Prosecutor nothing has been elicited in so for as 13 S.C.No.1756/2018 the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence is concerned. During the cross examination by the counsel for accused it is elicited that PW.1 has not informed him as to who murdered his son.
16. One Venkatesh Babu is examined as PW.4. He is the eye witness to the incident. He has not supported the case of the prosecution. Nothing has been elicited during the cross examination of PW.4 by the learned Public Prosecutor in so for as the alleged incident and assault by the accused persons is concerned.
17. One Ravikumar is examined as PW.5. The prosecution examined him to prove the incident of quarrel between the accused persons and the deceased on 03/04/2018 at about 9:45 near Cauvery Nagar Arch. He has not supported the case of the prosecution. He has given complete go by to the case of the prosecution. Nothing has been elicited during the cross examination of PW.5 by learned Public Prosecutor in so for as the incident of quarrel at 9:45 p.m. is concerned.
18. One Manjunath is examined as PW.6. He is the inquest mahazar witness. He has not supported the case of the prosecution. He has stated that he has not participated during the inquest mahazar and not given any statement before the 14 S.C.No.1756/2018 police and do not know anything about the incident. During the cross examination of PW.6 by the learned Public Prosecutor it has been elicited that on 14/04/2018 the police called him to the Bowring Hospital where the dead body of Ajay was shown to him. One Mohan Kumar and one Vishwanath were also present during the inquest mahazar. He found injuries near left ear of Ajay. The prosecution is able to elicit from the mouth of CW-6 in so for as the inquest conducted on the dead body of deceased Ajay at Bowring Hospital.
19. One Dileep is examined as PW.7. He is the seizure mahazar witness. He has not supported the case of prosecution. Nothing has been elicited during the cross examination of PW.7 by the learned Public Prosecutor with regard to seizure of blood stained damber from the spot.
20. One Sanjay is examined as PW.8. He is the seizure mahazar witness. He has not supported the case of the prosecution. Nothing has been elicited during the cross examination of PW.8 in so for as seizure of MO.1 and 2 from the spot.
21. One Manjunath.N. is examined as PW.9. he is eye witness to the incident. He has not supported the case of the 15 S.C.No.1756/2018 prosecution. Nothing has been elicited during the cross examination of PW.9 in so for as the alleged incident of murder.
22. One Vishwanatha is examined as PW.10. He is the inquest mahazar witness. He has stated that he has visited the morchery of Victoria Hospital to see the dead body of Ajay. But he has not supported the case of the prosecution and stated that he has not seen the dead body and the injuries over it. Nothing has been elicited during the cross examination of PW.10, in so for as the inquest mahazar is concerned.
23. One Dr.Suresh.V. is exained as PW.11. He is the person who conducted postmortem on the dead body of the deceased. During the examination in chief he has stated that he worked as an Assistant Professor in Bowring Hospital from 2009 to 2019. On 14/04/2018 Mahadevapura police Inspector has given requisition to conduct postmortem examination of the deceased Ajay in connection with Cr.No.144/2018. Accoridngly, on the same day he conducted postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased in between 3:30 pm to 4:30 pm. On examination he found the following external injuries.
16 S.C.No.1756/20181. Partially healed sutured wound with sutures in situ measuring 22 cm present obliquely across left side of neck extending from left ear to middle of mandible across lower border of mandible.
2. Partially healed surgically sutured wound measuring 12 cm situated horizontally across left side of neck, at 10 cm below left angle of mandible.
3. Partially healed surgically sutured wound measuring 10 cm situated horizontally over left side of neck at 5 cm below injury No.2.
4. Sutured wound measuring 6 cm situated obliquely over right side of neck, upper end is situated 5 cm below lower border of mandible.
5. Right ear is abraded and covered with black scab.
On further dissection of neck structures it is observed that injury numbers 1, 2 and 3 are partially healed chop injuries. Mandible fractured and fragmented into multiple pieces. Internal jugular vein sutured at three places (left IJV). Thrombus seen inside lumen of left IJ vein. Strap muscles of left side neck and vagus nerve sutured at multiple places. (Stenocleidomastoid and left myolohyoid muscles sutured at multiple places).
17 S.C.No.1756/20186. Sutured laceration over middle of occipital region measuring 8 cm (partially healed).
7. Abrasion over left side forehead 5 cm x 3 cm.
24. He has opined that death is due to complications of injury sustained to neck. Further he has stated that injury mentioned in Ex.P.12 could be caused with MO.3 chopper. Nothing worth mentioning is elicited during the cross examination of PW.1.
25. One Mallappa Devudu is examined as PW.12. He is the person who prepared rough sketch of the spot of incident. He has stated that on the request of the police Inspector Mahadevapura police station, Assistant Executive Engneer deputed him to prepare the spot sketch. Accordigly on 29/05/2018 Srinivas Murthy PC 4608 taken him to the spot and he prepared rough sketch of the spot and forwarded the same to Assistant Executive Engineer as per Ex.P.14.
26. One Kariyappa Koti is examined as PW.13. He is the person who received PM report from Bowring Hospital. He has stated that on 17/04/2018 he collected PM report at Ex.P.12 from Bowring Hospital and produced the same before the police Inspector.
18 S.C.No.1756/201827. One Shivashankar.M. is examined as PW.14. He is the person who received the complaint and registered the case. He has stated that on 3/04/2018 when he was discharging his duty as SHO at 2:20 a.m. i.e., early morning on 4/04/2018, PW.1 Ajay visited the police station and handed over the computarised complaint at Ex.P.1. On the basis of the same he registered a case in Cr.No.144/2018 for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with 34 of IPC.
28. One Chandraiah is examined as PW.15. He is the person who was deputed to guard the dead body of the deceased during the inquest mahazar. He has deposed regarding the same in his examination in chief.
29. One Umesh Kadam is examined as PW.16. He is the person who has taken the articles to FSL, Madiwala and received acknowledgment.
30. One Narayana is examined as PW.17. He is the person who has witnessed the quarrel between the accused and deceased Ajay near Cauvery Nagar Arch on 3/04/2018 at 9:45 p.m. But he has not supported the case of the prosecution. Nothing has been elicited during the cross examination of PW.17 in so for as the quarrel that took place between the accused and deceased is concerned.
19 S.C.No.1756/201831. One Srinivasa Murthy is examined as PW.18. He is the person who has shown the spot of incident to PW.12 to prepare rough sketch.
32. One Ravikumar is examined as PW.19. He is the person who has taken the FIR to the learned Magistrate. In his examination in chief he has stated that on 4/4/2018, he was deputed to submit the FIR to the Court and accordingly, at 11:00 a.m. he submitted Ex.P.16 FIR with complaint to 43 rd ACMM, Bengaluru.
33. One Smt.Prasheela is examined as PW.20. She is the person who received complaint from PSI Sri.Narayana Swamy regarding the alleged attempt of accused No.1 to assault him, when he tried to apprehend him and also regarding shooting as a self defence. The evidence of PW.20 indicates that on 5/04/2018 she received a complaint from Narayanaswamy and accordingly registered the same in Cr.No.151/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 353, 302, 307, 324 of IPC and on 8/04/2018 her staff produced the accused by name Charan before her and she recorded his voluntary statement and she has also stated regarding the discovery of iron chopper at the instance of accused No.1 in the said crime.
20 S.C.No.1756/201834. One Sri.R.Ashwath is examined as PW.21. He is the person who conducted the seizure mahazar. He has stated that on 4/04/2018 he visited the spot of incident secured panchas and collected blood stains from the spot. He has further stated that on 9/04/2018 he deputed one Shivakumar to get the cloths of the deceased from Manipal Hospital. Accordingly, the said Shivakumar produced the blood stained pant and underwear with an endorsement of medical officer of Manipal Hospital. He seized the same under mahazar at Ex.P.27 and identified the same as per MO.4 and 5 before the Court. Nothing worth has been elicited during the cross examination of PW.12, so as to discredit his evidence.
35. One T.Srinivas is examined as PW.22. He is the investigating officer. He has stated regarding the recording of statement of the witnesses and securing PM report and inquest mahazar and also regarding the arrest of the accused persons.
36. One Dr.Malathi is examined as PW.23. She is the person who has examined the articles sent to FSL and submitted report. In her examination in chief she has stated that she has examined blood stained tar, sample tar, one chopper, one pant and one underwear and she has opined that presence of blood stains were detected in article No.1, 3, 4 and 5 and the said blood is of the human origin belonging to 'O' group.
21 S.C.No.1756/2018Nothing has been elicited except a suggestion that she has given a false report during the cross examination of PW.23 by the counsel for the accused.
37. It is the specific case of the prosecution that 03/04/2018 in view of old animosity with the deceased the accused No.1 and 2 came near Cauvery Nagara Ward and hatched conspiracy against the deceased and picked up quarrel with him and thereafter at 11 p.m. in furtherance of their common intention went in front of VST Tiller Company situated beside BESCOM office Garudacharpalya in a TVS Victor along with accused No.3 and 4 and while the deceased was trying to cross the road, the accused persons got down from their vehicle and accused No.2 held the deceased collar tightly and accused No.3 pulled the hair of the deceased and accused No.1 assaulted on the neck of the deceased with the chopper due to which deceased succumbed to the injuries while undergoing treatment for the same. In support of their case, prosecution examined one Ajay as PW.1. He is the complainant as well as eye witness to the incident. In his examination in chief he has stated that deceased died due to the assault by Charan with machu. He has further stated that on 3/04/2018 around 11 p.m. while he was moving in his motor cycle from Singanapalya towards Garudahcara Palya deceased Ajay was crossing Whitefield road near Udupi park.
22 S.C.No.1756/2018At that time accused persons came in opposite direction and accused Lokesh was holding collar of the deceased, accused Manjunath pulled the hair of the deceased and accused No.1 assaulted the deceased with machu over his left side of the neck. He shifted the injured to the hospital with the help of a car which was moving in the said place and the injured was admitted to Manipal Hospital and thereafter he intimated the same to PW.2 Nagamma who is the mother of the deceased. On the next day of the incident police came to the spot and prepared mahazar and collected the blood stains. He has also identified the accused No.1 and 2 before the Court. It is pertinent to note that during his further examination in chief he has failed to identify the chopper which is alleged to have been used by the accused No.1 to assault the deceased. During the cross examination he has given complete go by to the case of the prosecution and has stated that he has not seen any incident. He has also stated that he has signed the complaint on the request of the police. During the re examination by learned Public Prosecutor he has stated that the evidence given by him during the examination in chief is false and whatever evidence given by him later on is true and correct.
38. The prosecution has examined other material witnesses to the incident and also examined some of the witnesses to 23 S.C.No.1756/2018 bring out the motive of the accused persons to commit murder of the deceased. It is pertinent to note that all the material witnesses to the case of the prosecution have turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. They have given complete go by to the case of the prosecution. Nothing has been elicited during their cross examination so as to connect the accused persons with the alleged crime.
39. One Smt.Nagamma is examined as PW.2. She is the mother of the deceased. Though she has not witnessed the incident she has stated that her son died due to the injuries sustained by him in a quarrel. She has further stated that her son was murdered by 4 persons and she do not know as to who murdered her son. She has stated that she do not know the accused No.1 and 2. Nothing has been elicited during the cross examination of PW.2 to connect the accused with the alleged offence.
40. One Teja Narayana is examined as PW.3. he is the father of the deceased who has stated that there was quarrel between some boys and his son wherein his son sustained injuries. But he has not stated anything about the assault by the accused persons.
24 S.C.No.1756/201841. It is pertinent to note that the prosecution has cited CW.11 Ajay.M. CW.12/Venkatesh.S. as seizure mahazar witnesses. But the prosecution has failed to secure the presence of said witnesses. Hence, CW.11 and 12 were dropped. On perusal of the same it indicates that the prosecution has failed to prove the seizure of the chopper alleged to have been used for commission of offence by the accused. It is pertinent to note that PW.22 P.Srinivas who is the investigating officer who has recorded the voluntary statement of the accused has not stated anything about the seizure of the weapon. But the evidence of PW.20/Smt.Prasheela indicates that she has recorded voluntary statement as per which the accused alleged to have admitted the incident and voluntarily produced the weapon used for commission of offence and led them to Singaiahnapalya near diesel shed railway track and produced iron chopper which was thrown on the bushes. The said chopper is marked as MO.3. It is pertinent to note that PW.1 who is an eye witness to the incident has categorically stated that MO.3 is not the weapon which is used by the accused for commission of offence. The evidence of PW.1 denying the use of MO.3 by the accused for commission of offence and non examination of seizure mahazar witnesses is fatal to the case of the prosecution and the prosecution has failed to prove the 25 S.C.No.1756/2018 seizure as well as the use of the said weapon by the accused for commission of the offence.
42. Except the evidence of PW.20 and 22 who are the investigating officers there is nothing on record to connect the accused with the alleged offence. Except the evidence of PW.1 and 2 there is no evidence to the effect that the accused No.1 and 2 were present in the spot of incident as alleged by the prosecution. Tough PW.1 has stated regarding their presence during the examination in chief he has given complete go by to the said evidence and stated that what ever stated by him during the examination in chief at the first instance is not true. Under these circumstances, it is not safe to rely upon his evidence without corroboration by any other independent witnesses.
43. In so for as the recovery of weapon at the instance of the accused is concerned prosecution examined Smt.Prasheela as PW.20. She has stated that a case came to be registered against accused No.1 for allegedly assaulting on Narayanaswamy, PSI while trying to apprehend him. When case came to be registered against accused No.1 in connection with the above assault PW.20 arrested him and recorded the voluntary statement wherein he disclosed that he would show the weapon used for commission of offence in this case.
26 S.C.No.1756/2018Accordingly, he led them near Diesel Shed railway track to Singaiahnapalya and produced one iron chopper from a bush as per MO.3 in the presence of CW.1/Ajay and PW.4/Venkatesh. It is pertinent to note that CW.1 and PW.4 have not supported the case of the prosecution in so for as recovery of weapon from accused No.1 is concerned. In so for as the discovery of weapon i.e., MO.3, except the evidence of PW.20, no independent mahazar witness have supported the case of the prosecution. Therefore, it is not safe to rely upon the evidence of PW.20 in so for as recovery of weapon is concerned.
44. The prosecution has examined one Dr.Malathi as PW.23 who has treated the deceased at first instance. She has stated that presence of blood stains were detected in article No.3 machu. But the prosecution has failed to prove the use of the said weapon by the accused which was sent for FSL examination. However, it is to be noted that the evidence of the doctor clearly indicates that the deceased sustained injuries on left side of his neck and the said injuries were chop injuries. Though the prosecution is able to prove the injury on the left neck of the deceased, there are no materials to show that the said injury was caused by the accused with the help of MO.3 chopper. Apart from above another important aspect to be noted is that PW.1 is a known person to accused No.1 27 S.C.No.1756/2018 and 2. immediately after incident PW.1 took the deceased to the hospital. As per Ex.P.17 PW.1 admitted the injured to the hospital at the first instance but he has not stated the names of the assailants. But he has stated the history as assault. If accused No.1 and 2 were known persons to him definitely he would have stated the names of the accused No.1 and 2 before the doctor at Ex.P.17. But no such disclosure is made by the PW.1 at the first instance. Therefore, prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and there are no sufficient materials to come to a conclusion that the accused No.1 and 2 assaulted the deceased with the alleged chopper. Therefore, the benefit of doubt has to be extended to the accused. Therefore, the point Nos.1 to 3 are answered in the Negative.
45. Point No.4: In view of my above discussions on point Nos.1 to 3 , I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under section 235(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, accused No.1/Charan @ Charan Raj and accused No.2/Lokesh @ Kodi are acquitted of the offences punishable 28 S.C.No.1756/2018 under Sections 307, 302, 120-B read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
The accused No.1 is on bail. The bail bonds and surety bonds of the accused No.1 shall stand canceled.
Accused No.2 who is in judicial custody is ordered to be released forthwith if his presence is not required in any other case.
M.O.1 to MO.5 are ordered to be preserved till disposal of split up case against accused No.3 and 4.
Acting under Section 357(A) of Code of Criminal Procedure a recommendation is made to the District legal Services Authority, Bengaluru to award compensation to CW- 2/Smt.Nagamma who is the mother of the deceased for the death of her son Ajay.
(Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-I online, typed by her directly, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this 8th day of May, 2025) (JAYAPRAKASH . A) LXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru 29 S.C.No.1756/2018
-:ANNEXURE:-
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED BY THE PROSECUTION:-
PW.1 Ajay
PW.2 Nagamma
PW.3 Teja Narayana
PW.4 Venkatesh Babu
PW.5 Ravikumar
PW.6 Manjunatha
PW.7 Dileep
PW.8 Sanjay
PW.9 N.Manjunatha
PW.10 Vishwanatha
PW.11 Dr.Suresh.V.
PW.12 Mallappa Devudu
PW.13 Kariyappa Koti
PW.14 M.Shivashankar
PW.15 Chandraiah
PW.16 Umesh Kadam
PW.17 Narayan
PW.18 M.Srinivasamurthy
PW.19 Ravikumar
PW.20 Prasheela
PW.21 R.Ashwath
PW.22 T.Srinivas
PW.23 Dr.Malathi
LIST OF WITNESS EXAMINED FOR DEFENCE:-
- None -30 S.C.No.1756/2018
LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED FOR PROSECUTION:-
Ex.P-1 Complaint.
Ex.P.1(a) Signature of PW1 Ex.P.1(b) Signature of PW14 Ex.P.2 Spot Mahazar Ex.P.2(a) Signature of PW1 Ex.P.2(b) Signature of Pancha Ex.P.2(c) Signature of Pancha Ex.P.3 Second complaint Ex.P.3(a) Signature of PW.2 Ex.P.4 Inquest Mahazar Ex.P.4(a) portion of statement Ex.P.5 Statement of PW3 Ex.P.6 Statement of PW4 Ex.P.7 Statement of PW5 Ex.P.8 Statement of PW7 Ex.P.9 Statement of PW8 Ex.P.10 Statement of PW9 Ex.P.11 Requisition Ex.P.11(a) Signature of PW11 Ex.P.11(b) Signature of PW22 Ex.P.12 PM Report Ex.P.12(a) Opinion of PW11 Ex.P.12(b&c) Signature of PW11 Ex.P.13 Sketch Ex.P.13(a) Signature of PW.12 31 S.C.No.1756/2018 Ex.P.13(b) Signature of PW.12 Ex.P.14 : Covering letter Ex.P.15 Requisition Ex.P.16 FIR Ex.P.16(a) Signature of PW14 Ex.P.17 MLC Intimation Ex.P.17(a) Signature of PW14 Ex.P.18 Receipt Ex.P.18(a) Signature of PW22 Ex.P.19 FSL Acknowledgment Ex.P.19(a) Signature of PW22 Ex.P.20 Statement of PW17 Ex.P.21 Voluntary statement of PW20 Ex.P.22 Seizure Mahazar Ex.P.22(a) Signature of A1 Ex.P.22(b) Signature of PW20 Ex.P.23 PF Form No.48/2018 Ex.P.23(a&b) Signature of PW20 Ex.P.24 PF Form No.44/2018 Ex.P.24(a&b) Signature of PW21 Ex.P.25 Requisition Ex.P.25(a) Signature of PW21 Ex.P.25(b) Signature of PW21 32 S.C.No.1756/2018 Ex.P.26 Report of PW21 Ex.P.26(a) Signature of PW21 Ex.P.27 Seizure mahazar Ex.P.27(a) Signature of PW21 Ex.P.28 PF Form No.50/2018 Ex.P.28(a&b) Signature of PW21 Ex.P.29 & 30 MLC Intimation Ex.P.29(a)&30(a) Signature of PW22 Ex.P.31 Form No.146(2) Ex.P.31(a) Signature of PW22 Ex.P.32 Requisition to Manipal Hospital Ex.P.32(a&b) Signature of PW22 Ex.P.33 Discharge summary of Ajay Kumar Ex.P.33(a) Signature of PW22 Ex.P.34&35 Death summary and Death certificate of Ajay Kumar Ex.P.34(a)&35(a) Signature of PW22 Ex.P.36&37 two photographs of deceased Ex.P.38 FSL Report Ex.P.39 Sample Seal Ex.P38(a)&39(a) : Signature of PW34 33 S.C.No.1756/2018 LIST OF DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED FOR DEFENCE:-
Nil LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION:-
MO.1 Container having blood stained tar
MO.2 Container having plain tar
MO.3 Machet
MO.4 Cement colour blood stained pant
MO.5 Blue colour blood stained underwear
LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR DEFENCE:-
- Nil -
(JAYAPRAKASH . A) LXVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge Bengaluru 34 S.C.No.1756/2018 Judgment pronounced vide separate judgment with following operative portion:
ORDER Acting under section 235(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, accused No.1/Charan @ Charan Raj and accused No.2/Lokesh @ Kodi are acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 307, 302, 120-B read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code.
The accused No.1 is on bail. The bail bonds and surety bonds of the accused No.1 shall stand canceled.
Accused No.2 who is in judicial custody is ordered to be released forthwith if his presence is not required in any other case.
M.O.1 to MO.5 are ordered to be preserved till disposal of split up case against accused No.3 and 4.
Acting under Section 357(A)
of Code of Criminal Procedure a
recommendation is made to the
District legal Services Authority,
35 S.C.No.1756/2018
Bengaluru to award
compensation to
CW-2/Smt.Nagamma who is the
mother of the deceased for the
death of her son Ajay.
LXVI Addl. CC & SJ Judge,
Bengaluru