Bangalore District Court
State By Ccb (F & M Squad) vs For Offences Punishable Under Sections ... on 10 April, 2023
KABC030349652018
Presented on : 16-05-2018
Registered on : 16-05-2018
Decided on : 10-04-2023
Duration : 4 years, 10 months, 25 days
IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL.CMM:
BENGALURU
Dated this the 10th day of April 2023
Present: Shri Anand T Chavan, B.Com., LL.B(Spl.).
I Addl. C.M.M BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT U/s. 355 Cr.P.C.,
Case No. : C.C.No.12298/2018
Date of Offence : 08.09.2017
Name of complainant : State by CCB (F & M Squad)
N.T. Pet, Bengaluru.
Jayanagar, Police Station,
(By Learned Sr. APP)
Name of accused : 1. G. Bharath Kumar Jain
S/o P.Gopal,
aged 45 years,
R/o No.179, R.V. road,
V.V.Puram, Bengaluru 04.
2 C.C.No.12298/2018
2. Kishore Kumar V.
S/o V.Lakshman Rao,
aged 38 years, R/o No.25/2,
S.K.Lane, Chikkamavalli,
near Maramma Temple,
Bengaluru 04.
(By Shri Ravishakar R. Advocate)
Offences complained off: U/s.29(2) of The Bureau of
Indian Standard Act, 2016
and 420 of IPC.
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Accused are acquitted
Date of Order : 10-04-2023
JUDGMENT
Assistant Commissioner of Police, CCB (F & M Squad), Bengaluru has filed charge sheet against accused for offences punishable under Sections 29(2) of The Bureau of Indian Standards Act, and 420 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of prosecution case are that:-
On 08-09-2017 C.W.1 the then ACP of CCB (H & B Squad) on the basis of credible information 3 C.C.No.12298/2018 that accused persons are indulged in marking "BIS 916 Hall mark" logo on gold and silver articles given by other jewelery shops without valid licence from concerned Bureau of Indian Standards Authority in their shop situated at No.306, Lucky Paradise, 22 nd cross, 3rd Block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru. Accordingly on said day in between 6.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. C.W.1 raided said shop of accused persons along with C.Ws.2 and 3 panchas and C.Ws.4 to 9 officials and found that accused No.1 being owner and accused No.2 being Manager of above shop were indulged in such illegal act of putting "BIS 916 Hall mark" logo to ornaments without valid licence. Hence C.W.1 seized the equipments used for such marking along with two gold chains. Thereafter, C.W.1 himself lodged first information before Jayanagar Police Station, which was registered by them in their Cr.No.277/2017 and FIR is issued. Subsequently investigation of the case is taken over by CCB 4 C.C.No.12298/2018 (F & M Squad). After recording statements of material witnesses and after completion of investigation I.O. filed charge sheet against accused for above offences.
3. Accused appeared during crime stage and they are enlarged on bail as per order of anticipatory bail granted by Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in Crl.Petition No.9001/2017. After filing of this charge sheet against accused, cognizance of alleged offences are taken against both accused. Accused have appeared before court. Copy of charge sheet is furnished to accused under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C and charge is framed against them. Accused have not pleaded guilt of alleged offences and they have claimed to be tried.
4. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined 2 witnesses as P.Ws.1 5 C.C.No.12298/2018 and 2 and got marked 6 documents as per Exs.P1 and 6. Statement of accused under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. is recorded and accused have denied incriminating evidence against them. Accused have not led any defence evidence.
5. On the basis of charge sheet allegations, the following points arose for consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused No.1 and 2 have committed offence punishable under section 29(2) of The Bureau of Indian Standards Act?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused No.1 and 2 have committed offence punishable under section 420 of IPC?
3. What order ?
6. Heard arguments. Perused oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution.
7. The following are findings to above points. 6 C.C.No.12298/2018
Point No.1 and 2: In the Negative Point No.3 : As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
8. Point No.1 and 2 :These points are taken together for consideration as findings on one point have bearing on other points.
9. P.W.1 Shantha Shetty W/o Arun Kumar, the then WASI of CCB has testified in her evidence that on 8-9- 2017 she accompanied C.Ws.1, 4 to 10 to Sai Hallmark shop of Jayanagar along with panchas and they seized machines of Hallmark, gold and silver ornaments and documents under Ex.P1 mahazar. She has identified her signature on it as per Ex.P1(a). She has further testified that they had information that somebody is putting fake hallmark on gold in said place and accordingly they seized two machines, two gold chains, hard discs, two monitors from the spot. She has identified photos of said articles as per Exs.P2 7 C.C.No.12298/2018 to P5 and further stated that she came to know that one Bharath was owner and one Kishore was Manager of said shop. In cross-examination by defence side P.W.1 admits that she has not signed labels affixed to seized articles and even Exs.P2 to P5 photos do not reveal such labels. She has further admitted that she does not know as to who took above photos and in which camera same were taken. The entire evidence of this witness is denied by defence side and it is suggested to her that no such raid was conducted and no incriminating articles were seized, she is deposing falsely as per instance of I.O. It is further suggested to her that Ex.P1 was signed by her at police station. P.W.1 has denied said suggestions.
10. P.W.2 Prashanth S/o Sathyavelu, who appears to be an independent witness has turned hostile by testifying that he does not know accused No.1 and 2 and he does not know business of 8 C.C.No.12298/2018 Sai Hallmark shop, which was situated beside their shop by name Lucky Paradise. He has further stated that he has never seen accused persons. Though P.W.2 is treated as hostile witness and cross-examined at length by learned Sr.APP, nothing worth while is elicited from his mouth to prove alleged raid, seizure of incriminating articles and alleged act of accused persons indulging themselves in above illegal business.
11. Further despite coercive steps,C.Ws.1 to 6, 10 to 12, 14 to 17 and 19 are not secured. Hence said witnesses are dropped. Further C.Ws.8, 9 and 18 are given up by prosecution. Thus on perusal of entire evidence of prosecution it shows that except evidence of aforesaid P.W.1 official and hostile evidence of an independent witness, absolutely there is nothing on record to prove alleged act of accused. Most importantly C.W.1, who is first 9 C.C.No.12298/2018 informant and raiding official has not entered into witness box. Further C.W.4 the other PI of CCB (H & B Squad) is also not secured. Further the very raid is not proved to the satisfaction of the court as C.Ws.2 and 3 mahazar witnesses are also not secured. Finally both I.Os and other independent witnesses are also not secured. Further no documents are placed before court nor any witness including landlord of the shop are examined to prove nexus between accused persons and aforesaid Sri Sai Hallmarking shop. Further none of the officials of Indian Bureau of Standards are cited as witnesses to prove that accused did not possess any licence of Halmarks. Hence the aforesaid uncorroborated evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 is insufficient to prove that accused persons had indulged in aforesaid illegal act of putting BIS Hallmark to ornaments without obtaining valid licence. Hence said evidence is insufficient to prove 10 C.C.No.12298/2018 that accused have committed alleged crime and it has not inspired the confidence of the Court. Hence it is incumbent upon this Court to hold that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused No.1and 2 have committed offences punishable under Sections 29(2) of The Bureau of Indian Standards Act and 420 of IPC. Hence, Point No.1 and 2 are answered in Negative.
12. Point No.3: -
For the reasons stated and findings given on point No.1 and 2, following is:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 and 2 are acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 29(2) of The Bureau of Indian Standards Act and 420 of IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused 11 C.C.No.12298/2018 shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stand canceled automatically.
The interim custody of item No.1 to 6 two gold chains, hard disc, laser machine, emerald testinfs etc., shall become absolute after expiry of Appeal period.
(Typed by me directly on computer, revised, corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 10 th day of April 2023).
(Anand T Chavan) st 1 Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for prosecution :-
P.W.1, Shantha Shetty, P.W.2, Prashanth;
List of exhibits marked for prosecution :-
Ex.P1, Mahazar,
Ex.P1(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P2 to
Ex.P5, Photos of articles,
Ex.P6, Statement of P.W.2;
List of material object :NIL
12 C.C.No.12298/2018
List of witnesses examined for defence:- NIL List of documents marked for defence:- NIL 1 st Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.
13 C.C.No.12298/2018(Judgment pronounced in the Open Court vide separate judgment) ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 and 2 are acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 29(2) of The Bureau of Indian Standards Act and 420 of IPC.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stand canceled automatically.
The interim custody of item No.1 to 6 two gold chains, hard disc, laser machine, emerald testinfs etc., shall become absolute after expiry of Appeal period.
I ACMM, Bengaluru.