Bangalore District Court
Banashankari P.S vs A1 Sandeep K Alias Can on 2 February, 2026
KABC010273922024
IN THE COURT OF LXVII ADDL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH.No.68)
PRESENT
SMT.RASHMI.M.
BA.LL.B., LL.M.
LXVII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
Dated this the 2nd day of February 2026.
S.C.No.1298/2024
COMPLAINANT: State by
Banashankari Police,
Bengaluru.
(By learned Public Prosecutor)
.Vs.
ACCUSED : 1. Sandeep.K. @ Can,
S/o.Krishnappa,
Aged about 29 years,
R/at.No.84/1, 6th Main,
Om Shakthi Temple Road,
Near Abbaiah Naidu Studio,
Chikkallasandra,
Bengaluru.
2. Rajendra @ Raja,
S/o.Thangai Bharathi,
Aged about 23 years,
R/of.5th Cross, 5th Main,
2 S.C.No.1298/2022
Hanumagiri Nagara,
Chikkallasandra,
Bengaluru.
3. Mohan.K.
S/o.Reddappa,
Aged about 28 years,
R/at.No.21/1, 7th Cross,
Sriramanagar,
Ittamadu,
BSK 3rd Stage,
Bengaluru.
4. Sandeepa. R. @ Bakery,
S/o.Late Ramesha,
Aged about 28 years,
R/of.5th Cross,
Revenue Layout,
Bengaluru.
5. Kiran Kumar @ Thale,
S/o.Late Rajendra,
Aged about 31 years,
R/at.No.G.3, 43/1,
8th Cross, Ittamadu,
BSK 3rd Stage,
Bengaluru.
6. Sridhara,
S/o.Late Rajendra,
Aged about 34 years,
R/at.No.G.3, 43/1,
8th Cross, Ittamadu,
BSK 3rd Stage,
Bengaluru.
7. Shashank,
S/o.Late Raja,
Aged about 21 years,
R/at.No.43/1, 8th Cross,
Ittamadu,
3 S.C.No.1298/2022
BSK 3rd Stage,
Bengaluru.
9. Pavan @ Pavan Kumar, @
Tarakari,
S/o.Prabhakar Naidu,
Aged about 23 years,
R/at.No.134, 2nd Main,
Near Abbaiah Naidu Studio,
Chikkallasandra,
Bengaluru.
10. Prakash,
S/o.Elumalai,
Aged about 20 years,
R/at.No.283, 6th Cross,
Bhuvaneshwari Nagar,
BSK 3rd Stage,
Bengaluru.
(By Sri.R.R.H., Advocate for
A.1, 2 to 7, 9 and 10)
JUDGMENT
The P.S.I., of Banashankari Police Station, Bengaluru has filed the charge sheet against the accused Nos.1, 2 to 7, 9 and 10 by dropping the case against the accused Nos.8, 11 and 12 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 324, 326, 307, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 149 of IPC.
2. The learned Magistrate after complying with the provisions under Section 207 Cr.P.C., has committed the case under Section 209 of Cr.P.C., against the accused 4 S.C.No.1298/2022 Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 to the Court of Prl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bangalore, as the offence under Section 307 of IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions. After committal of the case, this case is made over to this court for trial in accordance with law.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:
That on 18.06.2023 at about 9-50 p.m., in front of Thriveni Creatives Printing Press situated at 11th Cross, Raghavendra Colony, Padmanabha Nagar, within the limits of Banashankari Police Station, Bengaluru, the accused had wrongfully restrained C.W.1 by parking the Honda Activa bearing No.KA-05-LQ-3517 in the middle of the road so as to prevent C.W.1 driving his TATA ACE vehicle ahead. Thereafter when C.W.2 asked the accused to take away the 2 wheeler and make way for their TATA Ace. At that time, the accused No.2 abused C.W.2 in filthy language. When C.W.1 questioned the same, the accused No.10 abused C.W.1 in filthy language. Then the accused No.2 called accused Nos.9 to the spot. In 10-12 minutes, the accused Nos.1, 3 to 7, 9 and 10 formed an unlawful assembly holding deadly weapons. All the accused abused C.Ws.1 to 8 in filthy language. Then the accused No.2 5 S.C.No.1298/2022 punched on the face of C.W.1 and stabbed him on the right side of his chest causing bleeding injuries. C.W.1 was assaulted with cement slab on his head causing bleeding injury. All the accused gave life threat to C.Ws.1 to 8 and the accused No.7 assaulted C.W.5 with a cement slab causing injuries on his left elbow, finger ring of left hand. While the accused No.4 assaulted C.W.6 on his left leg causing simple injury. The accused No.8 punched C.W.8 with a iron punch on his face, resulting which his teeth broke. While the accused No.6 punched C.W,7 on his face with a iron punch, causing his teeth set to fall off. Thereby the accused are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 341 and 307 r/w. Section 149 of IPC.
4. On securing the presence of the accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10, the charge has been framed against them for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 324, 326, 307, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 149 of IPC. The accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 have pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The case is posted for prosecution evidence. The prosecution has examined 11 witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 11 and got marked 37 documents from Exs.P.1 to 37 and M.Os.1 to 7. After closure of the evidence of prosecution witnesses, the 6 S.C.No.1298/2022 statement of accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., was recorded. The accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 have denied the incriminating evidence stated against them. The accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 have chosen not to adduce defense evidence.
5. Heard.
6. The points raised for determination are as under :
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 18.06.2023 at about 9-50 p.m., in front of Thriveni Creatives Printing Press, situated at 11th Cross, Raghavendra Colony, Padmanabhanagar, within the limits of Banashankari Police Station, Bengaluru, the accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 along with other accused in furtherance of their common object to commit the crime had formed an unlawful assembly and thereby, committed an offence punishable under Section 143 r/w. Section 149 of IPC ?
2. Whether the prosecution further proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the alleged date, time and place, the accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 along with other accused being the members of an unlawful assembly in furtherance of their common object to commit the crime were holding deadly 7 S.C.No.1298/2022 weapons like knife & iron punch and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 144 r/w.
Section 149 of IPC ?
3. Whether the prosecution further proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the alleged date, time and place, the accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 along with other accused being the members of an unlawful assembly in furtherance of their common object to commit the crime were holding deadly weapons like knife & iron punch in their hands have committed rioting and thereby, committed the offences punishable under Sections 147 and 148 r/w. Section 149 of IPC ?
4. Whether the prosecution further proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the above said date, time and place, the accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 along with other accused being the members of an unlawful assembly in furtherance of their common object to commit the crime have wrongfully restrained C.W.1 and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 341 r/w. Section 149 of IPC ?
5. Whether the prosecution further proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the alleged date, time and place, the accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 along with other accused being the members of an unlawful assembly in furtherance of their 8 S.C.No.1298/2022 common object to commit the crime have assaulted C.Ws.1, 2, 7, 8 and accused Nos.5 and 6 after caught hold of C.Ws.7 and he was punched on his face with a iron punch, resulting which the teeth set of C.W.7 was removed and the tooth of C.Ws.7 and 8 were broken, causing grievous bleeding injuries and thereby committed the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 r/w. Section 149 of IPC ?
6. Whether the prosecution further proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the alleged date, time and place, accused No.3 being the member of unlawful assembly along with other accused with a common object to commit the murder of C.W.2 had assaulted him with a knife on the right side of his chest causing bleeding injuries and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 307 r/w. Section 149 of IPC ?
7. Whether the prosecution further proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the alleged date, time and place, the accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 along with other accused being the members of an unlawful assembly with a common object had abused C.Ws.1 to 8 in filthy language in order to provoke public peace and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 504 r/w. Section 149 of IPC ?
9 S.C.No.1298/20228. Whether the prosecution further proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the alleged date, time and place, the accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 along with other accused being the members of an unlawful assembly with a common object had posed life threat to C.Ws.1 to 8 and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 506 r/w. Section 149 of IPC ?
9. What Order ?
7. My findings on the above points are as under :
POINT No.1 - Negative,
POINT No.2 - Negative,
POINT No.3 - Negative,
POINT No.4 - Negative,
POINT No.5 - Negative,
POINT No.6 - Negative,
POINT No.7 - Negative,
POINT No.8 - Negative,
POINT No.9 - As per final order,
for the following :
REASONS
8. POINTS Nos.1 TO 8: Since all these points are interconnected to each other, they have been taken up together for discussion in order to avoid the repetition of facts and evidence.
10 S.C.No.1298/20229. The case of the prosecution is that on 18.06.2023 at about 9-50 p.m., in front of Thriveni Creatives Printing Press situated at 11th Cross, Raghavendra Colony, Padmanabha Nagar, within the limits of Banashankari Police Station, Bengaluru, the accused had wrongfully restrained C.W.1 by parking the Honda Activa bearing No.KA-05-LQ-3517 in the middle of the road so as to prevent C.W.1 driving his TATA ACE vehicle ahead. Thereafter when C.W.2 asked the accused to take away the 2 wheeler and make way for their TATA Ace. At that time, the accused No.2 abused C.W.2 in filthy language. When C.W.1 questioned the same, the accused No.10 abused C.W.1 in filthy language. Then the accused No.2 called accused Nos.9 to the spot. In 10-12 minutes, the accused Nos.1, 3 to 7, 9 and 10 formed an unlawful assembly holding deadly weapons. All the accused abused C.Ws.1 to 8 in filthy language. Then the accused No.2 punched on the face of C.W.1 and stabbed him on the right side of his chest causing bleeding injuries. C.W.1 was assaulted with cement slab on his head causing bleeding injury. All the accused gave life threat to C.Ws.1 to 8 and the accused No.7 assaulted C.W.5 with a cement slab causing injuries on his left elbow, finger ring of left hand. While the accused No.4 assaulted C.W.6 on his left leg causing simple injury. The accused No.8 punched C.W.8 with a iron punch on his face, resulting which his teeth broke. While the accused No.6 punched C.W,7 on 11 S.C.No.1298/2022 his face with a iron punch, causing his teeth set to fall off. Thereby the accused are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 341 and 307 r/w. Section 149 of IPC.
10. P.W.1-Sri.Pradeep Kumar Shetty has identified his signature on the complaint (Ex.P.1) and mahazar (Ex.P.2) as per Exs.P.1(a) and 2(a). He knows C.Ws.2 to 8, while C.Ws.4 and 7 are his brothers. He does not know C.W.9. He does not know the accused present before the court and earlier to that day he had not seen them. About 3 years ago, at about 7-30 p.m., when he along with C.W.2 with a banner were going near Padmanabhanagar, at that time there was small fight in front of their vehicle. Due to the fight, he and C.Ws.2 to 8 sustained simple injuries. No weapons were used during the fight. He stated that he does not know as to who did what to whom. He stated that he does not know as to who scolded and threatened whom. He stated that no one had wrongfully restrained him at that time. He does not know as to what is written in the complaint. He has stated that he had gone to Maharaja Agrasena Hospital for treatment. In the hospital, the police had asked him to come to the Police Station. Accordingly when he went to the Police Station, they took his signature on the documents. He does not know as to what was written in the said documents. He does not know as to the place where he 12 S.C.No.1298/2022 has signed the mahazar. He stated that the police did not seize any property in his presence. He has not seen the accused in the Police Station. He has not given any statement to the police. He has not seen property pertaining to this case.
As the witness has not supported the prosecution case, on the request of learned Public Prosecutor he has been treated as hostile. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, he has denied the suggestions made with respect to the complaint said to have been given by him. Also he has denied the suggestion that he had signed the mahazar at the place shown by him. He has denied all the suggestions regarding the incident, assault, recovery of weapons and spot mahazar. He has also denied having the dresses of C.Ws.2 and 4 given to the police. He has denied having given further statement (Ex.P.3) to the police.
11. P.W.2-Sri.Abhishekh has stated that he does not know the accused. He has not seen them in the Police Station or elsewhere. He stated that about 2-3 years ago at 6-00 p.m., near Padmanabhanagar, Banashankari, near a house at a distance of 5-10 mtrs, a fight had taken place, at that time he and C.W.2 were there. During the galata someone had hit him on his head, for which he had taken treatment in the hospital, 13 S.C.No.1298/2022 but he does not know who else sustained injuries. He has stated that he has not given any statement to the police. He has not identified the clothes and 2 stones present before the court.
As the witness has not supported the prosecution case, on the request of learned Public Prosecutor he has been treated as hostile. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, he has denied having given the statement (Ex.P.4) before the police. He has denied the suggestion that the shirt present before the court belongs to him. He has denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsely before the court.
12. P.W.3-Sri.Ranjith Shetty has not identified the accused. He stated that he has not seen the accused earlier. He stated that about 2-3 years ago, C.Ws.1 and 2 had gone to bring the banner and while they were coming near Padmanabhanagar at about 9-50 p.m., a vehicle came in front of them and there was a small fight. The fight had taken between 3 of them and others. He stated that they had hit them with the hands, for which they had gone to the hospital for treatment. Then the police asked them to come to the Police Station where they signed the documents, but he does not know as to what was written in it. He stated that he does not know as to when he signed the mahazar. He stated that the police did not seize any 14 S.C.No.1298/2022 property in his presence. He has not given any statement to the police. He has not identified the property present before the court.
As the witness has not supported the prosecution case, on the request of learned Public Prosecutor he has been treated as hostile. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, he has denied having given statement to the police as per Ex.P.5. He has denied all the suggestions regarding the incident and seizure of property. He has denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsely before the court.
13. P.W.4-Sri.Prathap Shetty has stated that he has not seen the accused and he seeing them for the first time before the court. He stated that about 2 years ago, C.W.1 called him up and asked him to come near the house at Padmanabhanagar, so he along with C.W.5 went to the spot. There they came to know about the fight. They went to stop the fight. It was a group fight. He does not know as to what the accused did at that time. He has not given any statement to the police. He has not identified the M.Os., before the court.
As the witness has not supported the prosecution case, on the request of learned Public Prosecutor he has been treated as hostile. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, nothing has been elicited in support of the prosecution case. He has denied having 15 S.C.No.1298/2022 given statement to the police as per Ex.P.6.
14. P.W.5-Sri.Lokesh Shetty has stated that he has not seen the accused. He stated that he is seeing them for the first time before the court. He stated that about 2 years ago, C.W.4 called him up and asked him to come near the house at Padmanabhanagar, so he along with C.W.4 went to the spot. There they came to know about the fight. They went to stop the fight. It was a group fight. He does not know as to what the accused did at that time. He has not given any statement to the police. He has not identified the M.Os., before the court.
As the witness has not supported the prosecution case, on the request of learned Public Prosecutor he has been treated as hostile. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, nothing has been elicited in support of the prosecution case. He has denied having given statement to the police as per Ex.P.7.
15. P.W.6-Sri.Ajith has stated that he has not seen the accused. He stated that he is seeing them for the first time before the court. He stated that about 2 years ago, C.W.4 called him up and asked him to come near the house at Padmanabhanagar, so he along with C.W.4 went to the spot. There they came to know about the fight. They went to stop the fight. It was a group fight. He does not know as to what the accused did at 16 S.C.No.1298/2022 that time. He has not given any statement to the police. He has not identified the M.Os., before the court.
As the witness has not supported the prosecution case, on the request of learned Public Prosecutor he has been treated as hostile. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, nothing has been elicited in support of the prosecution case. He has denied having given statement to the police as per Ex.P.8.
16. P.W.7-Sri.Prabhakar has stated that he has not seen the accused and he is seeing them for the first time before the court. He stated that about 2 years ago, C.W.4 called him up and asked him to come near the house at Padmanabhanagar, so he along with C.W.4 went to the spot. There they came to know about the fight. They went to stop the fight. It was a group fight. He does not know as to what the accused did at that time. He has not given any statement to the police. He has not identified the M.Os., before the court.
As the witness has not supported the prosecution case, on the request of learned Public Prosecutor he has been treated as hostile. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, nothing has been elicited in support of the prosecution case. He has denied having given statement to the police as per Ex.P.9.
17. P.W.8-Sri.Naveen has stated that he has not seen 17 S.C.No.1298/2022 the accused and he is seeing them for the first time before the court. He stated that about 2 years ago, C.W.4 called him up and asked him to come near the house at Padmanabhanagar, so he along with C.W.4 went to the spot. There they came to know about the fight. They went to stop the fight. It was a group fight. He does not know as to what the accused did at that time. He has not given any statement to the police. He has not identified the M.Os., before the court.
As the witness has not supported the prosecution case, on the request of learned Public Prosecutor he has been treated as hostile. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, nothing has been elicited in support of the prosecution case. He has denied having given statement to the police as per Ex.P.10.
18. P.W.9-Sri.Sudarshan R. Shetty has identified his signatures on the mahazar (Ex.P.11) and notice (Ex.P.12). About 2 years ago when he had gone to the Police Station to see C.Ws.1 to 8 who had sustained simple injuries, at that time he had signed the document. He stated that he is there in the photo in the mahazar, but does not know as to where it was taken. He stated that he has not seen the knife and 2 iron punch. He stated that he has not seen the 2 wheeler in a photograph shown to him. He stated that he does not know as to what is written in the mahazar, but has identified his signature on the M.Os.
18 S.C.No.1298/2022As the witness has not supported the prosecution case, on the request of learned Public Prosecutor he has been treated as hostile. In his cross examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, nothing has been elicited in support of the prosecution case.
19. P.W.10-Dr.S.R.Jagannath has deposed about medical examination conducted on 18.06.2023 on Pradeep Shetty, Abhishekh Shetty, Lokesh Shetty, Prathap Shetty, Naveen, Prabhakar Shetty, Ajith and in this regard, he has given Wound Certificates (Exs.P.17 to 823). He had sent 7 intimations (Exs.P.24 to 30) to the Police Station.
In his cross examination by the learned advocate for the accused, he has denied the suggestion that he has not treated the injured persons as stated in his examination in chief and he has created false Wound Certificates as per the instructions of the police.
20. P.W.11-Sri.Shivashankar, P.S.I., has stated that on 19.06.2023 when he was on night duty, he had gone to the hospital and received MLCs (Exs.P.28 to 30). On the same day night at 12-50 C.W.1 came to the Police Station and gave the complaint (Ex.P.1). On receiving it he registered the FIR (Ex.P.31). On the same day he gave notice to C.Ws.12 and 13 & at the place shown by C.W.1, he conducted the spot mahazar (Ex.P.2) and seized 5 properties. Thereafter he deputed C.Ws.21 to 19 S.C.No.1298/2022 26 to trace the accused. They produced accused Nos.4 to 7 before them. He arrested them and recorded their voluntary statements and received the information about other accused. On 20.06.2023 he produced the accused before the court and took them for 8 days police custody, but handed over the accused No.5 to the judicial custody. On 21.06.2023 he recorded the statements of C.Ws.1 to 8. At 10-00 p.m, the accused No.1 was produced before him. On 22.06.2023 he produced the accused No.1 before the court and took him to the police custody till 27.06.2023. He sent the seized articles to FSL along with C.W.27. On the same day the absconding accused No.2 was arrested by him at 10-15 p.m. On 24.06.2023 he arrested the absconding accused No.10. On the same day, he produced both the accused before the court and took them to the police custody till 27.06.2023. On 26.06.2023 he recorded the voluntary statement of accused No.2 (Ex.P.34), who had told that he had kept the 2 wheeler used for committing the offence in his relatives house and if he is taken, he would show the same. He then issued notice to C.Ws.14 and 15 asking them to be the panchas. Between 4-30 to 5-30 p.m., in front of building bearing No.29, 6 th Cross Road, Hanumagiri Nagar, there was a Activa Honda bearing No.KA-05-LQ-3517 and he seized the same under mahazar (Ex.P.11) and took the photograph of the 2 wheeler. On 27.06.2023 he produced the accused 20 S.C.No.1298/2022 Nos.1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 10 before the court and again obtained the police custody of accused Nos.1 and 2 till 30.06.2023. On 30.06.2023 he produced the accused Nos.1 and 2 before the court. On 5.07.2023 he received the Wound Certificates from Maharaja Agrasena Hospital. On 26.07.2023 he took the FSL Report (Ex.P.13) from Online portal. On 30.07.2023 the accused No.8 who had obtained anticipatory bail had appeared before him and he released him on bail. On 10.08.2023 the accused Nos.3 and 9 who had also obtained anticipatory bail appeared before them and he released them on bail. He has identified the seized properties i.e., stone (M.O.1), Puma company jerkin (M.O.2), Shirt (M.O.3), Half sleeve white colour shirt (M.O.4), yellow coloured half sleeve shirt (M.O.5), 10 inch long plastic handle knife (M.O.6), 2 stainless half moon shape iron punch which are marked as M.O.7. On completion of investigation, he has filed the charge sheet against the accused. He has identified the accused before the court.
In his cross examination by the learned advocate for the accused, he has denied the suggestion that without carrying out any investigation, he has filed a false charge sheet against the accused.
21. On considering the oral and documentary evidence placed before the court, it is pertinent to note 21 S.C.No.1298/2022 that the complainant along with all other injured persons have turned hostile and not supported the prosecution case. Further there is nothing on record to prove that the seized weapons were used by the accused to commit the alleged offences. The victims have specifically stated that they have not seen the accused. The victims have refused to identify the shirts alleged to have been given by them to the police. The Investigating Officer has deposed about the investigation carried out by him. Even though he has stated that a 2 wheeler was seized at the instance of the accused, but no corroborating evidence placed before the court. In the FSL Report, it just states that the blood found on articles are human blood and which is of 'A' blood group. But the said finding is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused. In the absence of cogent and convincing evidence, it can be safely said that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 324, 326, 307, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 149 of IPC. Hence, the Point Nos.1 to 8 are answered in the Negative.
22. POINT No.9 : In view of my findings on Point Nos.1 to 8 as above, my finding on this point is as per the following :
22 S.C.No.1298/2022ORDER Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C., accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 and 10 are acquitted for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 324, 326, 307, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 149 of IPC.
The bail bonds and surety bonds of the accused Nos.1 to 7, 8 and 10 stand cancelled, subject to appeal.
M.Os.1 to 5 being worthless, are ordered to be destroyed and the M.Os.6 & 7 are ordered to be confiscated to the State, after the appeal period.
(Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-II directly on Computer, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 2 nd day of February 2026) (RASHMI.M) LXVII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for prosecution:
P.W.1 Pradeep Kumar Shetty
P.W.2 Abhishekh
P.W.3 Ranjith Shetty
P.W.4 Prathap Shetty
P.W.5 Lokesh Shetty
23 S.C.No.1298/2022
P.W.6 Ajith
P.W.7 Prabhakar
P.W.8 Naveen
P.W.9 Sudarshan R. Shetty
P.W.10 Dr.S.R.Jagannath
P.W.11 Shivashankar.B.
List of documents exhibited for prosecution:
Ex.P.1 Complaint
Ex.P.1(a) Signature of P.W.1
Ex.P.1(b) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.2 Mahazar
Ex.P.2(a) Signature of P.W.1
Ex.P.2(b) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.3 Further Statement of P.W.1 (relevant
portion)
Ex.P.4 Statement of P.W.2 (relevant portion)
Ex.P.5 Statement of P.W.3 (relevant portion)
Ex.P.6 Statement of P.W.4 (relevant portion)
Ex.P.7 Statement of P.W.5 (relevant portion)
Ex.P.8 Statement of P.W.6 (relevant portion)
Ex.P.9 Statement of P.W.7 (relevant portion)
Ex.P.10 Statement of P.W.8 (relevant portion)
Ex.P.11 Seizure Mahazar
Ex.P.11(a) Signature of P.W.9
Ex.P.11(b) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.11(c) Signature of accused No.2
Ex.P.12 Police Notice
Ex.P.12(a) Signature of P.W.9
Ex.P.12(b) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.13 FSL Report
Ex.P.14 Requisition
Ex.P.15 'B' Register Extract
Ex.P.16 Blood Report
Ex.P.17 Wound Certificate
Ex.P.17(a) Signature of P.W.10
Ex.P.17(b) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.18 Wound Certificate
Ex.P.18(a) Signature of P.W.10
Ex.P.18(b) Signature of P.W.11
24 S.C.No.1298/2022
Ex.P.19 Wound Certificate
Ex.P.19(a) Signature of P.W.10
Ex.P.19(b) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.20 Wound Certificate
Ex.P.20(a) Signature of P.W.19
Ex.P.20(b) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.21 Wound Certificate
Ex.P.21(a) Signature of P.W.10
Ex.P.21(b) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.22 Wound Certificate
Ex.P.22(a) Signature of P.W.10
Ex.P.22(b) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.23 Wound Certificate
Ex.P.23(a) Signature of P.W.10
Ex.P.23(b) Signature of P.W.11
Exs.P.24 to 30 Police Intimations
Exs.P.24(a) to Signatures of P.W.10
30(a)
Exs.P.28(b) to Signatures of P.W.11
30(b)
Ex.P.31 F.I.R.
Ex.P.32 Notice
Ex.P.32(a) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.33 Property Form
Ex.P.33(a) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.34 Voluntary Statement of accused No.2
(relevant portion)
Ex.P.34(a) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.34(b) Signature of accused No.2
Ex.P.35 Property Form
Ex.P.35(a) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.36 Report of C.W.26
Ex.P.36(a) Signature of P.W.11
Ex.P.37 Report of C.W.26
Ex.P.37(a) Signature of P.W.11
List of Material Objects produced and got marked for production:
M.O.1 Stone
M.O.2 Jerkin
25 S.C.No.1298/2022
M.O.3 Shirt
M.O.4 Half Sleeve shirt
M.O.5 Half Sleeve shirt
M.O.6 Knife
M.O.7 Iron Punch
List of witnesses examined and documents exhibited for accused:
-Nil-
(RASHMI.M) LXVII Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
Digitally
signed by
RASHMI
RASHMI M
M Date:
2026.02.03
11:24:09
+0530