Bangalore District Court
Sushma S M vs Nitesha K on 22 January, 2024
C.C.No.22445/2018
KABC030603982018
Presented on : 14-08-2018
Registered on : 14-08-2018
Decided on : 22-01-2024
Duration : 5 years, 5 months, 8 days
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY.
Dated this 22nd day of January 2024
PRESENT : SRI.VEDAMOORTHY B.S. B.A.(L), LL.B.
II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City
JUDGMENT UNDER SECTION 355 OF Cr.P.C.
1.Sl. No. of the case C.C.No.22445/2018 Date of commission of From 15.02.2015 to
2. the offence (As per F.I.R.) 17.02.2018 Konanakunte Police Station,
3. Name of the complainant Bengaluru City.
Nithesh K., S/o A.Krishnappa, Aged about 32 years,
4. Name of the accused R/at No.94, Konanakunte Main Road, Konanakunte, Bengaluru - 62.
The offences complained Sections 323, 498A and 504 of
5.
of the Indian Penal Code 6. Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty 2 C.C.No.22445/2018 7. Final order The accused is acquitted 8. Date of order 22.01.2024
The Police Sub-Inspector of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru has filed Police Report against the above named accused alleging that he has committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The Prosecution case in brief is that on 05.02.2015, the marriage of the accused was solemnized with CW1 and after their marriage, they were residing together at No.94, Opposite to Honey Foundation Play Home, Konanakunte Main Road, Konanakunte, Bengaluru within the territorial jurisdiction of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru City. During that time, the accused was quarreling with CW1 for petty matters and he was abusing her in filthy languages; beating with his hands and harassing her physically and mentally. Therefore, CW1 filed Domestic Violence case against the accused. CW1 withdrawn the said case as the accused told that henceforth, he is not committing any harassment to CW1. Still, the 3 C.C.No.22445/2018 accused was harassing CW1 physically and mentally. In that regard, CW2 to CW5 went to the house of the accused and advised him by conducting panchayath. In the month of March 2017, CW1 gave birth to a girl child. On 17.02.2018 when CW1 to CW3 came to the house of the accused along with the child, the accused snatched the child; abused them in filthy languages and voluntarily caused simple hurt by beating them with his hands and pushed them out of the house. Thereby, the accused has committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 504 of the Indian Penal Code .
3. Based on the First Information of CW1, the crime was registered in Crime No.82/2018 at Konanakunte Police Station. On completion of the investigation, the Police Sub- Inspector of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru City filed Police Report against the accused alleging that he has committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. After taking cognizance of 4 C.C.No.22445/2018 the said offences, the criminal case was registered against the accused and the process was issued to him. He has appeared before this Court and enlarged on bail. The copies of the Police Report and other prosecution papers are furnished to the accused under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, since there were grounds for presuming that the accused has committed offences triable by this Court, charges for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 504 of the Indian Penal Code have been framed and read over to the accused in Kannada language. He has pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.
4. To prove the charges framed against the accused, out of 11 witness cited by the Investigation Officer in the Police Report, the Prosecution has produced the oral evidences of three witnesses as PW1 to PW3. Among them, PW1 Smt.Sushma M.S. is the First Informant, Mahazar and the injured witness. PW2 S.K.Mallesh and Smt.C.S.Veda Kusuma Tejaswini are the parents of PW1 and the injured witnesses. 5 C.C.No.22445/2018 The Prosecution has also produced the documentary evidences in Ex.P1 to Ex.P4. Among them, Ex.P1 is the First Information, Ex.P2 is the Spot Mahazar and Ex.P3 and Ex.P4 are the Witness Statements of PW2 and PW3 respectively.
5. Since, there were no incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidences of the prosecution witnesses against the accused, the examination of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was dispensed with. Heard the arguments of learned Senior Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused. Perused the materials available on record.
6. The points for determination are;
1. Whether prosecution has proved the offences charged against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 504 of the Indian Penal Code beyond reasonable doubt?
2. What order or sentence?
6 C.C.No.22445/2018
7. My answers to the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : In the Negative,
Point No.2 : As per final order for the following;
REASONS
8. POINT No.1 :- As per the case of the prosecution, based on Ex.P1 given by PW1, the crime has been registered in Crime No.82/2018 and on investigation, since, there are evidences collected by the Investigation Officer to prosecute the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, the Police Report was filed. In the First Information - Ex.P1, there are statements of PW1 with regard to the alleged incident committed by the accused. PW1 in her examination-in-chief has deposed that on 05.02.2015, her marriage was solemnized with the accused and after their marriage, the accused was looking after well. She has also deposed in her examination-in-chief that the accused has not given any physical or mental harassment to her; the accused has not beaten and abused her in filthy languages; since there were 7 C.C.No.22445/2018 some petty differences between her and the accused, she gave First Information as per Ex.P1; she does not know its contents; she does not know the contents of Ex.P2; she signed the said document at Police Station and; the Police have not conducted any Mahazar in her presence at the place of incident. She has been considered as hostile witness and cross-examined at the request of the prosecution. During cross-examination, she has denied the contents of Ex.P1; she gave it and the mahazar conducted at the place of incident as per Ex.P2 in her presence. Nothing has been elicited in her cross-examination supporting the case of the prosecution. She has admitted that she has compromised the matter with the accused.
9. PW2 and PW3 have deposed in their examination-in- chief that on 05.02.2015, the marriage of PW1 was solemnized with the accused; after marriage, they were living together and the accused was looking after her well; the accused has not given any physical and mental harassment 8 C.C.No.22445/2018 to PW1; he never beaten her and abused her in filthy languages; no quarrel was taken place between them and the accused and they have not given any Witness Statements to the Police. They have been considered as hostile witnesses and cross-examined at the request of the prosecution. During cross-examination, they have denied the contents of their Witness Statements recorded by the Investigation Officer, The denied portion of their Witness Statements were marked as Ex.P3 and Ex.P4 respectively. Nothing has been elicited in their cross-examination supporting the case of the prosecution. They have admitted that they have compromised the matter with the accused.
10. On perusal of the above evidences of PW1 to PW3, it appears that the First Informant and the injured witnesses PW1 to PW3 have deposed not supporting the case of the Prosecution. They have deposed in their cross-examination that they and the accused have compromised the matter. Therefore, if the evidences of the other prosecution witnesses are recorded, no purpose will be served. For this reason, the 9 C.C.No.22445/2018 evidences of CW4 to CW11 are dropped. Under these circumstances, I am holding that the Prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 504 of the Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, I answer Point No.1 in the Negative.
11. POINT No.2 :- For the reasons stated in Point No.1, the prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 504 of the Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, the accused is not found guilty for the aforesaid offences charged against him. In the result, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDERS Under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C, the accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
10 C.C.No.22445/2018His bail bond executed and cash surety furnished under Section 437 of Cr.P.C. will be in force till completion of appeal period and thereafter, it will be stand canceled.
(Typed by the Stenographer in the Court Computer on my direct dictation, printout taken, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on 22.01.2024) (VEDAMOORTHY B.S.) II Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
ANNEXURE Witnesses Examined on behalf of Prosecution :-
PW1 : Smt.Sushma S.M.,
PW2 : S.K.Mallesh,
PW3 : Smt.Veda Kusuma Tejaswini.
Documents marked on behalf of Prosecution :-
Ex.P1 : First Information,
Ex.P1(a) : Signature,
Ex.P2 : Spot Mahazar,
Ex.P2(a) : Signature,
Ex.P3 & 4 : Witness Statements.
11 C.C.No.22445/2018
Material objects marked on behalf of Prosecution :-
NIL Witnesses Examined on behalf of the accused :-
NIL Documents marked on behalf of the accused :-
NIL (VEDAMOORTHY B.S.) II Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.