Bangalore District Court
State By Police Sub-Inspector vs Narasimha @ Narsimha Reddy on 13 April, 2017
IN THE COURT OF LVI ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE
PRESENT: SRI.HATTIKAL PRABHU.S.
M.A.,LL.B(Spl) LL.M.,
DATED THIS THE 13th DAY OF APRIL, 2017
C.C.No. 6393/2014
Complainant State by Police Sub-Inspector,
Kengeri police station.
-Vs-
Accused
Narasimha @ Narsimha Reddy,
S/o.Tangappa,
Aged about 22 years,
R/at.next to Nyathappa's
house,Chittibabu Layout,
near lake, Hosakerehalli,
Bangalore.
Date of commission of In between 30.10.2013
offence and 05.11.2013
Name of the informant Jayaram
of crime
Offences complained of U/Sec.457, 380 r/w
Sec.511 of IPC
Arrest of accused 04.12.2013
Release of accused Accused is in judicial
custody
Commencement of 07.11.2016
recording of evidence
Closure of recording of 01.03.2017
evidence
State represented by Sr.Asst.Public Prosecutor
Accused represented by Veena Hadagali-Adv.,
Plea of the accused and Pleaded not guilty
2 C.C. No.6393 of 2014
his examination
Final Order/Opinion of Acquitted
the Judge
JUDGMENT
(U/S.355 of Cr.P.C) This is a charge sheet submitted by the Police Sub - Inspector of Kengeri Police station for the offences punishable U/Sec. 457, 380 r/w Sec. 511 of IPC against the accused in Cr.No.353/2013.
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution runs thus:
2(a). The brother of informant of crime by name Madhsudhan was in USA on work and his brother's wife and his children had been to Hospet for celebrating festival in between 30.10.2013 and 05.11.2013. In between the said dates, somebody gained entry into the house No. 43, Krishna County, 2nd cross, Mylasandra, by breaking open the door lock of the house, with an intention to commit theft in the said house and tried to commit theft. Thereby the accused committed the above said offences. 3 C.C. No.6393 of 2014 2(b). On 05.11.2013, the C.W.1-Jayaram/informant of crime lodged complaint to the police, C.W.7 received the complaint and registered the same. After completing investigation, he filed charge sheet against the accused for the offence U/sec.457, 380 r/w Sec 311 of IPC.
3. After submitting charge sheet, cognizance of the alleged offence is taken and criminal case against accused came to be registered. Accused was arrested and he is in J.C. and he is represented by his counsel.
4. Charge sheet copy furnished to the accused by complying with Sec.207 Cr.P.C. After hearing before charge, since there are good and sufficient grounds to proceed further charge was framed for the offences punishable U/Sec. 457 and 380 R/W Sec. 511 of IPC and read over to the accused. Accused pleaded not guilty. Hence matter is posted for recording evidence on behalf of prosecution.
4 C.C. No.6393 of 2014
5. On behalf of prosecution, in all evidence of P.W. 1 to 3 adduced and documents Ex.P.1 to 5 are got marked. Prosecution evidence is closed.
6. After closure of prosecution evidence, statement of accused as contemplated U/Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C is recorded. When all the incriminating circumstances found against him in the evidence read over and explained, the accused denied the same as false. Accused did not choose to adduce evidence on his behalf.
7. Heard the arguments.
8. Now the points that would arise for the determination of the Court is:
1. Whether the prosecution proves the alleged guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt?
2. What Order?
9. My findings on the above point is :
For Point No.1- in the Negative For Point No.2- As per the final order for the following.....
REASONS
10. Point No.1: On behalf of prosecution, the informant of crime by name Jayaram is examined as 5 C.C. No.6393 of 2014 P.W.1. This witness in the chief examination deposed that in the year 2014, there was an attempt to commit theft in his brother's house located at Mylasandra and the neighbors of the said house informed him over phone. Immediately he went to his brother's house and found that somebody had break open the door of the house and gained entry into the house and had scattered all the articles in the house and he came to know that no articles were stolen from the house. Since his brother is at USA, he lodged complaint as per Ex.P.1 and thereafter police conducted mahazar on the spot as per Ex.P.2. Further she deposed that after 2 months of the incident, police called him to the police station, but not shown him the accused. This witness was treated as hostile witness. Learned Counsel for accused cross examined this witness. This witness in the cross examination deposed that the door of the house was locked and a separate door lock was not put to the door. Further he deposed that mahazar was conducted in between 8.00 A.M to 8.30 A.M.
11. C.W.4-H.C is examined as P.W.2 and this witness in his chief examination deposed that he was deputed to 6 C.C. No.6393 of 2014 trace the accused. He went to Bettadasanapura bus stand and found accused standing there and he tried to flee away on seeing him. He caught hold of the accused and produced him before Investigating Officer, along with report. The P.W.2 identified the accused through Video conference. Counsel for the accused did not cross examine P.W.2, as such evidence of P.W.2 remains unchallenged.
12. C.W.6/P.W.3-Police Inspector in his evidence deposed that on 04.12.2013, C.W.4 and 5 produced accused before him. He further deposed that he interrogated the accused and accused explained that he attempted to commit theft in this case. He recorded the voluntary statement of the accused as per Ex.P.5 and on the point of jurisdiction he transferred the case file to Kengeri Police station. The counsel for accused failed to cross examine P.W.3, hence the evidence of this witness remained unchallenged on record.
13. Prosecution failed to secure other witnesses. Repeatedly NBW was issued against other witnesses. For one or the other reason, prosecution failed to secure other 7 C.C. No.6393 of 2014 witnesses. NBW was issued through DCP also. Since accused is in judicial custody and sufficient opportunities were given, evidence is taken as closed as per order dated 01.03.2017.
14. During course of trial, the defence of the accused is total denial of the case of prosecution.
15. During course of arguments, Learned Sr.Asst.Public Prosecutor supported the case of prosecution. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for accused submitted that evidence available on record is not pointing out towards the guilt of the accused.
16. This court observed that above mentioned evidence of P.W.1 is not supporting the case of prosecution as to identification of the accused. According to the case of prosecution, P.W1 saw the accused in the police station. Biut the P.W1 deposed that he did not see the accused in the police station. This aspect creates serious doubt. Though the evidence of P.W2 and 3 remained unchallenged on record, their evidence is not sufficient to 8 C.C. No.6393 of 2014 believe that accused committed theft in the house of brother of C.W.1. The prosecution failed to secure other material witnesses.
17. As I have above mentioned, the evidence placed on record is not pointing towards the guilt of the accused. Absolutely no evidence is placed on record as to identification of the accused. PW.1 himself turned hostile to the case of the prosecution regarding identification of the accused. Under these circumstances this Court comes to the conclusion that prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused. Accordingly I answer point no.1 in the Negative.
18. Point No.2: In view of my answer to point no.1 in the Negative, as an answer to point No.2 , I proceed to pass the following....
ORDER
Acting U/Sec.248(1) of Cr.P.C., I
hereby acquit accused for the offences
punishable U/Sec. 457, 380 R/w 511 of
IPC.
9 C.C. No.6393 of 2014
Accused is set at liberty forthwith.
The bail bond of accused stands cancelled.
Accused is ordered to be released forthwith, if he is not required in any other case.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by her on computer and after corrections made by me and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 13th day of April 2017.
(HATTIKAL PRABHU.S) LVI ADDL. C.M.M,BANGALORE ANNEXURE
1. LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION P.W.1: Jayaram P.W.2: R.Ashok P.W.3: Bhaskar V.B
2. LIST OF THE DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION Ex.P. 1 : Complaint Ex.P.1(a) : Signature of PW-1 Ex.P. 2 : spot mahazar Ex.P.2(a) : Signature Ex.P.3 :Statement of P.W1 Ex.P.4 : Report Ex.P.4(a) : Signature of P.W.2 Ex.P.5 : Relevant portion of Voluntary statement of accused LIST OF THE WITNESS EXAMINED AND DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENCE-
NIL LIST OF THE MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION-
NIL (HATTIKAL PRABHU.S) LVI ADDL. C.M.M,BANGALORE 10 C.C. No.6393 of 2014