Bangalore District Court
State By: Madivala Police Station vs A1: Kaverappa S/O Ramareddy on 3 September, 2015
1 C.C.19440/2012
IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE
BENGALURU CITY
Dated this Thursday the 3rd day of September 2015
Present: Sri.Mohan Prabhu, B.Com., M.A, LL.B.,
III Addl., CMM.,
Bengaluru.
C.C.No.19440/2012
Complainant : State by: Madivala Police Station
V/s
Accused : A1: Kaverappa S/o Ramareddy, 60 yrs,
A2: Manjunatha S/o Kaverappa, 23 yrs,
They are R/at:No:785, 2nd "B" Main,
8th Block, Koramangala, Bengaluru
Nagar.
(By Sri.KVS Adv., Bengaluru)
---
::JUDGEMENT::
Case No. : C.C.No.19440/2012 Date of offence : 14/5/2011 Complainant : G.N.Madhukar Accused : Named above 2 C.C.19440/2012 Offence : U/ss. 341, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC Charge : Accused No.1 and 2 pleaded not guilty Final order : Accused 1 and 2 are acquitted Date of order : 3/9/2015 The brief statement of the Reasons for the decision : As follows --- ::REASONS::
The PSI of Madivala Police Station has filed the chargesheet against the accused No.1 and 2 for the offences punishable U/ss. 341, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC.
2.The case of the prosecution briefly stated as follows:
That on 15/5/2011 at about 2-30 p.m. within the jurisdiction of Madivala Police Station, at Venkatapura 8th Cross, near Vigneshwara Filling Center when Cw.1 was proceeding by walk at that time the accused persons with common intention picked up quarrel with Cw.1 and 3 C.C.19440/2012 wrongfully restrained him from further movement. Accused persons assaulted Cw.1 with hands and with Hockey stick and voluntarily caused him simple injuries. The accused persons have also gave life threat to Cw.1.
3. Based on the complaint lodged by Cw.1, the Madivala Police Station Police registered the case in Crime No.469/2011 and dispatched FIR to the Court. The Investigating Officer took up the investigation and visited the spot and drawn the spot mahazar. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the witnesses. The Investigating Officer after collecting the wound certificate on completion of investigation has filed chargesheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/ss.341, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC.
4. Accused No.1 and 2 who engaged counsel and released on bail. The chargesheet copies duly furnished to the accused and thereby provision u/s.207 of Cr.P.C., is complied with. After hearing on both sides charge came to 4 C.C.19440/2012 be framed for the offences punishable U/ss.341, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC for which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.
5. During the course of trial on the side of the prosecution complainant and injured is examined as Pw.1 and documents Ex.p1 and p2 are marked. Since there is no incriminating evidence against the accused recording of statement of the accused u/s.313 of Cr.P.C., is dispensed with. No defence evidence is led.
6. I heard the arguments on both sides.
7. The following points arise for my consideration:
1.Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that on 15/5/2011 at about 2-30 p.m. within the jurisdiction of Madivala Police Station, at Venkatapura 8th Cross, near Vigneshwara Filling Center the accused persons with common intention picked up quarrel with Cw.1 and wrongfully restrained him from further movement and assaulted him with hands and with Hockey stick and voluntarily caused him simple injuries and also gave life threat to him and thereby accused persons have committed the offences punishable U/ss.341, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC?
2. What Order?5 C.C.19440/2012
8. My findings on the above points:
Point No.1: In the negative Point No.2: As per final order ::REASONS::
9. Point No.1: Pw.1 is the complainant and injured. It is the specific case of the prosecution is that on 15/5/2011 at about 2-30 p.m. within the jurisdiction of Madivala Police Station, at Venkatapura 8th Cross, near Vigneshwara Filling Center the accused persons with common intention picked up quarrel with Cw.1 and wrongfully restrained him from further movement and assaulted him with hands and with Hockey stick and voluntarily caused him simple injuries and also gave life threat to him. But quite contrary to this Pw.1 complainant and injured completely turned hostile to the case of the prosecution by stating that no such incident was occurred.
10. Pw.1 deposed that the accused persons have not picked up quarrel with him and not assaulted him with hands 6 C.C.19440/2012 and with Hockey Stick. He states that the accused persons have not caused any injuries to him. He states that the accused persons have not given life threat to him. He states that in the year 2011 there was some altercation between him and the accused persons, hence, he went to the Police Station at that time the Police took his signatures on Ex.p1 and Ex.P2. He states that no mahazar was conducted in his presence. Having turned hostile to the case of the prosecution learned Sr.APP cross examined Pw.1 in detail. In his cross examination Pw.1 denied the entire contents of the documents Ex.p1 complaint and Ex.p2 mahazar. Nothing is elicited from his mouth to support the case of the prosecution.
13. In this case Pw.1 is the important witness but not supported the case of the prosecution. Pw.1 is not deposed anything against the accused. There is no incriminating evidence against the accused. It is elicited from the mouth of Pw.1 is that he has compromised the case with the accused. Pw.1 and the accused may set right their 7 C.C.19440/2012 differences, hence, Pw.1 may not support the case of the prosecution for which the prosecution cannot be blamed. Even though learned Sr.APP cross examined Pw.1 in detail, nothing is elicited from his mouth to support the case of the prosecution. There is no iota of evidence on the side of the prosecution to show that the accused persons have committed the offences punishable U/ss. 341, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC. The prosecution is failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, I answered Point No.1 in the negative.
14. Point No.2: In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
::ORDER::
U/s.248(1) of the Cr.P.C., the accused No.1 and accused No.2 are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable U/ss.341, 323, 324, 506 r/w 34 of IPC.
Their Bail bond stands cancelled after completion of appeal period.8 C.C.19440/2012
The material object which is mentioned in PF. No.145/2011 being worthless is ordered to be destroyed after completion of appeal period.
(Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in open Court, this the 3/9/2015).
(Mohan Prabhu), III Addl., Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
::ANNEXURE::
1. List of witnesses examined for the prosecution:
Pw.1: G.N.Madhukar Reddy
2. List of documents marked on the side of the prosecution:
Ex.p1: Complaint Ex.P1(a): Signatures Ex.p2: Mahazar Ex.p2(a): Signature
3. Material objects marked: Nil
4. Defence: Nil
- --
III ACMM., 9 C.C.19440/2012 Bengaluru.