Bangalore District Court
D.J.Halli P.Stn vs Mujahid Pasha Mujja @ Mujja Don on 12 January, 2024
1 S.C.No.245/2020
KABC0A0007392020
IN THE COURT OF THE XXVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL
& SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL, BENGALURU,
[CCH.NO.29]
Present :- Sri. K.M. Rajashekar, B.Sc., L.L.M.,
Dated this the 12th day of January 2024
S.C.No.245/2020
Complainant:- State by Police Inspector,
D.J. Halli Police Station,
Bengaluru.
(By Public Prosecutor)
V/s
Accused:- 4. Mujahid Pasha, Mujja @
Mujja Don,
S/o. Syed Basha,
Aged about 37 years,
Residing at No.22, 16th Cross,
Devid Road, Sagai Puram,
Bengauluru-560 045.
(By Sri Anees Ali Khan, Advocate )
1. Date of Offence : 21.3.2016
2 S.C.No.245/2020
2. Date of report of Offence : 22.3.2016
3. Date of arrest of accused : ------
4. Date of release of accused on bail : Accused No.4 is on
bail
5. Period of undergone in custody
(during pre-trial) : Y M D
: 00 00 00
6. Name of the Complainant : Smt. Malunnisa.
7. Commencement of trial : 27.9.2019
8. Closing of evidence : 10.4.2023
9. Offences complained of : U/S 143, 148, 448, 427,
504, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC.
10. Opinion of the Judge : Accused found not
guilty, hence, acquitted.
Digitally signed by
KM K M RAJASHEKAR
RAJASHEKAR Date: 2024.01.23
15:12:22 +0530
(K.M. RAJASHEKAR)
XXVIII Additional City Civil and
Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
This is a Charge Sheet submitted by the C.W.20 Sri.Nayaz Ahmed, Police Sub-Inspector, D.J.Halli Police 3 S.C.No.245/2020 Station, against the Accused for the offences punishable U/Sec. 143, 148, 448, 427, 504, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are as under:
That the Accused No.4 along with other Accused No.1 to 3, 5 to 8, 9 and 10 on 21.3.2016 at about 11.30 p.m., went near the house of CW.1 at No.117, Madina Mohalla, Modi Road, within the limits of D.J. Halli Police Station, Bengaluru, armed with deadly weapons, formed an unlawful assembly with an intention to commit the murder of CW.1's husband and son and have trespassed into the house of CW.1 with a common intention to commit mischief, criminally intimidated CW.1 and in furtherance of the said common intention the Accused caused mischief by damaging the TV and Beeru in the house of CW.1 with a machete and gave provocation to CW.1 intending or knowing it to be likely that by such provocation will cause CW.1 to break the public peace or to commit any other offence and with a common intention to cause hurt and to murder CW.1 and in 4 S.C.No.245/2020 furtherance of the common intention have picked up quarrel with the CW.1 and assaulted CW.1 with knife and caused hurt to CW.1 with a common intention of murder CW.1 have assaulted her with knife and caused pain to her left hand and thereby the Accused No.2, 3, 5 and 9 along with other accused have committed the offences punishable under Section 143, 148, 448, 427, 504, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC. Hence, the complaint.
3. Thereafter, based on the complaint of Complainant -C.W.1- Smt. Malunnisa, a case is registered in Crime No.74/2016 of D.J. Halli Police Station for the offences punishable U/S 143, 148, 448, 427, 504, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC., and after completion of investigation submitted Charge Sheet for the offences punishable U/S 143, 148, 448, 427, 504, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC.
4. The Committal Court after taking cognizance of the offences has registered the case against the Accused Person. Later, Accused produced before the Court and remanded to judicial custody. The copy of Charge Sheet 5 S.C.No.245/2020 was furnished to the Accused person as required U/S 207 of Cr.P.C., and thereafter heard both sides, case has been committed for trial.
5. After registration of case before this Court, Accused marked their appearance before the Court through his Counsel. After hearing both sides, charge for the offences punishable U/S 143, 148, 448, 427, 504, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC of IPC., has been framed and it was read over and explained to the Accused Person in the language known to them. The Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried by the Court. Hence, the trial was fixed.
6. The Prosecution has examined 9 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.9 out of 20 witnesses cited in the Charge Sheet, got marked documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5 and MO.1 and MO.2 in support of its case.
7. After conclusion of Prosecution evidence, statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., of the Accused was record and the Accused pleaded not guilty. Accused did not choose to lead any evidence on their behalf. 6 S.C.No.245/2020
8. Heard both side arguments and perused the records.
9. Now the points that arose for my consideration are as under:
1) Whether the Prosecution proves that, the Accused on 21.3.2016 at about 11.30 p.m., went near the house of CW.1 armed with deadly weapons formed an unlawful assembly with an intention to murder of CW.1's husband and son and have trespassed into the house of CW.1 criminally intimidate CW.1 and damaged the TV and Beeru with a machete and gave provocation to CW.1 and assaulted CW.1 with knife and caused hurt to her left hand and thereby committed the offences punishable under Section 143, 148, 448, 427, 504, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of Indian Penal Code?
2) What Order?
10. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the Negative.
7 S.C.No.245/2020Point No.2 : As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
11. Point No.1:- Upon going through the Prosecution theory, it indicates that, according to the Accused No.2, 3, 5 and 9 along with other Accused No.1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10 on 21.3.2016 at about 11.30 p.m., went near the house of CW.1 at No.117, Madina Mohalla, Modi Road, within the limits of D.J. Halli Police Station, Bengaluru, armed with deadly weapons, formed an unlawful assembly with an intention to commit the murder of CW.1's husband and son and have trespassed into the house of CW.1 with a common intention to commit mischief, criminally intimidated CW.1 and in furtherance of the said common intention the Accused caused mischief by damaging the TV and Beeru in the house of CW.1 with a machete and gave provocation to CW.1 intending or knowing it to be likely that by such provocation will cause CW.1 to break the public peace or to commit any other offence and with a common 8 S.C.No.245/2020 intention to cause hurt and to murder CW.1 and in furtherance of the common intention have picked up quarrel with the CW.1 and assaulted CW.1 with knife and caused hurt to CW.1 with a common intention of murder CW.1 have assaulted her with knife and caused pain to her left hand and thereby the Accused No.2, 3, 5 and 9 along with other accused have committed the offences punishable under Section 143, 148, 448, 427, 504, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC. In support of its case the Prosecution has examined 9 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.9 out of 20 witnesses cited in the Charge Sheet, got marked documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5 and MO.1 and MO.2 in support of the Prosecution.
12. Upon going through the materials available on record, it indicates that in support of their case, Prosecution cited 20 witnesses in the Charge Sheet and able to examined only 9 witnesses out of 20 witnesses.
13. It is to be noted that this accused is arrayed as accused No.4 in crime No.74/2016. However, as he remained absent in crime stage itself. The case against 9 S.C.No.245/2020 him is split in CC.No.54475/2018. However later, he was secured and committed to this Court along with accused No.6. But during the course of trial, accused No.6 passed away. The case against the accused Nos.2, 3 and 5 are split up in SC.No.1460/2016 judgment pronounced. However, after securing this accused, learned Public Prosecutor and defense counsel adopt the evidence recorded in SC.No.1460/2018 along with the documents marked therein. The accused was examined 313 answered record and fresh arguments on merits.
14. According to the Prosecution on 21.3.2016 at about 11.60 p.m., the Accused trespassed the house of the Complainant and picked up quarrel with her and ransacked the house, destroyed the house articles, committed riot and stabbed CW.1 on her right hand and attempted to kill her etc.
15. In support of its case, the Prosecution examined as many as 09 witnesses out of 20 witnesses cited in the charge sheet. It is significant here to note that, except PW.1 none of the witnesses have supported the case of 10 S.C.No.245/2020 Prosecution. Even though, PW.1 in her examination-in- chief deposes about some gang entered her house, threatened her and do away Rs.30,000/- cash etc. But, she failed to identify the weapon used to assault her. Apart from that, the Prosecution utterly failed in proving the glass pieces wherein the Complainant herself denies those glass pieces belongs to her and recovered from her house. It is significant here to note that during the examination-in-chief, itself she failed to identify the Accused No.2, 3 and 5 and claims that these Accused persons were not present in the gang. This witness was treated hostile and cross-examined by the Prosecution. During the cross-examination also she clearly denied the suggestion of the Prosecution. The Prosecution also examined PW.2 who is the Panch Witness to the Spot Mahazar. This witness also denies collection of glass pieces in his presence under Ex.P.3. PW.3 to PW.5 are cited as eye-witnesses to the incident, but these witnesses turned hostile and did not support the case of the Prosecution. PW.6 is another Panch witness to the Spot Mahazar also not supported the case of Prosecution. 11 S.C.No.245/2020 PW.7 is the Police Official who apprehended the Accused. PW.8 and PW.9 are the Investigating Officers. It is significant here to note that the Medical Officer was not examined in this case, as she was not alive. Upon careful perusal of the evidence on record, it is seen that except the evidence of PW.1, absolutely no incriminating evidence is available on record to hold the guilt of the Accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Apart from that, the very Complainant failed to identify the Accused No.2, 3 & 5 against whom the trial is going on. Even according to the Prosecution, the Accused No.2, 3 & 5 are not present in the gang who trespassed into the house of the Complainant and ransacked and committed riot and assaulted her. The non support of Prosecution witnesses is fatal to the case of the Prosecution. Above all, the very weapons is not proved by the Prosecution, much less the materials objects. Under these circumstances, I hold that the Prosecution has utterly failed in proving the guilt against the Accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, answered accordingly.
12 S.C.No.245/2020
16. Point No.2:- From the discussions made in the above Point No.1, it is very much clear that Accused are entitled for an order of acquittal for the offences punishable under Section 143, 148,448, 427, 504, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC and in the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Invoking the provisions U/S 232 of Cr.P.C., Accused No.4 is acquitted for the offences punishable U/S 143, 148, 448, 427, 504, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of IPC of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.).
The article in P.F.No.74/2016 dtd:
22.3.2016 of D.J. Halli Police Station being worthless, is ordered to be destroyed, after expiry of appeal period, if the same is not required for any other purpose.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, typed & computerized by her, corrected and signed by me and then pronounced in the open Court on this the 12th day of January 2024).
KM Digitally signed by K M
RAJASHEKAR
RAJASHEKAR Date: 2024.01.23 15:12:41 +0530 (K.M. RAJASHEKAR) XXVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bengaluru. 13 S.C.No.245/2020 ANNEXURE Witnesses examined on behalf of Prosecution:
P.W.1 : Smt. Malunnisa.
P.W.2 : Mr. Mohammad Rafiq.
P.W.3 : Smt. Jabina.
P.W.4 : Smt. Gulab Jan.
P.W.5 : Mr. Babu Baig.
P.W.6 : Mr. Noorulla Khan.
P.W.7 : Mr. Suhail.
P.W.8 : Mr. Shivanna.
P.W.9 : Mr. Nayaz Ahmed.
Exhibits marked on behalf of Prosecution:
Ex.P.1 : Complaint.
Ex.P.2 : Statement of PW.1.
Ex.P.3 : Spot Mahazar.
Ex.P.4 : Statement of PW.3.
Ex.P.5 : Statement of PW.4.
Witnesses examined on behalf of Accused:
Nil.
Exhibits marked on behalf of Accused:
Nil.
Material Objects marked on behalf of Prosecution:
MO.1 : Knife.
MO.2 : Glass pieces.
KM Digitally signed by K M
RAJASHEKAR
RAJASHEKAR Date: 2024.01.23 15:12:53 +0530 (K.M. RAJASHEKAR) XXVIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bengaluru.