Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

State By Rajagopalanagara Police vs And His Surety Shall Be In Force For The on 4 March, 2020

    IN THE COURT OF THE VII ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.

                     Dated this the 4th day of March 2020

                 Present: Sri. Laxman R. Kurane, B.Com., LL.M.,
                           VII ADDL. C.M.M., Bengaluru.


                     JUDGMENT U/S. 355 OF Cr.P.C.:

1. CC NO.                  :      26200/2018

2. Date of offence         :      19.6.2017

3. Complainant             :      State by Rajagopalanagara Police
                                  Station

4. Accused                 :      Suresha S/o Huchappa, 23 years,
                                  R/at No. 331, 3rd cross, 3rd Main,
                                  Thunga Clinic Road,
                                  Rajagopalanagara,
                                  Bangalore.

5. Offences complained of :       Sec. 427, 452, 323, 354, 342 IPC

6. Plea                    :      Accused pleaded not guilty

7. Final order             :      Acting U/s. 248 (1) Accused is
                                  acquitted


      The PSI of Rajagopalanagara Police Station has filed the final report

as against the accused person for the offences punishable under Sec. 427,

452, 323, 354, 342 IPC.
                                      2


      2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution is that on 19.6.2017

at 4 p.m. accused trespassed into the house of C.W.1 Kumari Sangeetha at

5th cross, Duggalamma Layout, Laggere, Bangalore, wrongfully restrained

C.W.1, damaged the show-case and caused loss of Rs 5,000/-, assaulted her

with his hands on her cheek, dragged her and outraged her modesty and

and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.


      3. The accused appeared through his counsel and was enlarged on

bail. Prosecution papers are furnished to the accused person in compliance

of 207 of Cr.P.C and after hearing before charge, since no grounds were

made out for his discharge, charges were framed, read over to the accused

person in the language known to him.          The accused person having

understood the same, denied it to be false and claimed to be tried. As such,

the matter was set down for trial.


      4. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused person

had cited C.W.1 to 10 as its charge sheet witnesses, among whom C.W.1

has been examined as P.W.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 and P.2. The accused

was not questioned under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. as there were no
                                        3


incriminating material available in the case of the prosecution.       As such,

the matter was posted for arguments.

      5. Heard the learned Sr. APP for the prosecution and the learned

counsel for the accused person. Perused the materials available on record.


      6. Following points arise for my consideration:
         (1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that
             the accused person has committed the offence punishable
             under Sec. 427, 452, 323, 354, 342 IPC ?
         (2) What order ?

      7. Having regard to the arguments heard and the materials placed on
record, my answer to the above points are :
      Point No.1         :      In the negative.
      Point No.2         :      See final order, for the following :

                                   REASONS
Point No.1 :

      8. P.W.1 is the complainant. She has turned out hostile to the case of

the prosecution and stated that the accused has not come to her house, not

abused her in filthy language and damaged the show-case of her house and

also not assaulted her. In her cross-examination P.W.1 has stated that she

has compromised the matter with the accused person. Hence, the prayer of

Sr. APP for issuance of summons to other witnesses is rejected as it will be
                                                   4


of futile exercise in view of evidence of P.W.1.                     Hence, the prosecution

has failed to prove the guilt of the accused person beyond all reasonable

doubt. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the negative.



Point No. 2 :

        9. In view of the reasons stated at point No.1, I proceed to pass the
following:
                                               ORDER

Invoking the jurisdiction vested to this Court under Sec. 248(1) of the Criminal Procedure code, the accused is acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 427, 452, 323, 354, 342 IPC.

Bail bond and surety bond executed by the accused and his surety shall be in force for the period of 6 months.

Properties seized under P.F. No. 122(A)/2017 shall be destroyed after Appeal period is over as they are valueless.

(Dictated to the Stenographer on-line, typed and computerized and print out taken by him is verified, corrected & then pronounced by me in the Open Court dated this the 4th day of March 2020) (LAXMAN R. KURANE), VII ACMM, BENGALURU.

5

ANNEXURES:

List of witnesses examined on behalf of the Prosecution:
P.W.1 : Sangeetha List of documents marked on behalf of the Prosecution:
Ex.P.1             Complaint
Ex.P.2         :   Spot mahazar


List of Material Objects marked on behalf of the Prosecution:
Nil For defence: - NIL -
VII ACMM, BENGALURU.
6
Judgment is pronounced in open court.
Invoking the jurisdiction vested to this Court under Sec. 248(1) of the Criminal Procedure code, the accused is acquitted of the offences punishable U/s. 427, 452, 323, 354, 342 IPC.
Bail bond and surety bond executed by the accused and his surety shall be in force for the period of 6 months.
Properties seized under P.F. No. 122(A)/2017 shall be destroyed after Appeal period is over as they are valueless.
VII ACMM, BENGALURU.
7 8