Bangalore District Court
State By Kodigehalli vs Srinivasappa S/O on 20 February, 2017
IN THE COURT OF THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY
Dated this the 20th day of February 2017
PRESENT:
Sri Rudolph Pereira, B.Com., L L.M.,
CMM, Bengaluru
C.C. No.10810/2013
Complainant : State by Kodigehalli
Police, Bengaluru City
-V/s-
Accused : 1. Srinivasappa s/o
Ashwathappa, 60 yrs,
2. S.Harisha s/o Srinivasa,
45 yrs,
(A1 & A2 are R/at Ashwathappa
Garden, Opposite Muthuraya
Temple, Kodigehalli, Tata Nagar
Main Road, Bengaluru-92)
3. Hanumanthu s/o Huchappa,
34 yrs, No.215, Panchayath
Office Road, Kodigehalli,
Bengaluru-92,
Phone:9945921109.
2 CC No.10810/2013
4. Ananda s/o Ramaiah, 35 yrs,
No.12, Ramagudi Street,
Byatarayanapura,
Bengaluru-92,
Phone:9845408873.
Date of offence : 27-11-2012
Offence : Section 447, 341, 506
R/W 34 of IPC
Plea of the : Accused Persons pleaded
Accused not guilty
Final order : Accused No-1 to 4
Acquitted
Date of Judgment : 20-02-2017
J U D G M E N T U/S 355 of Cr.P.C.
The Police Sub-Inspector of Kodigehalli Police
Station, Bengaluru City, has filed this charge sheet
against accused persons for the offences punishable
under Section 447, 341 and 506 R/W 34 of IPC.
3 CC No.10810/2013
2. The brief facts of the case of prosecution are
that-
On 27-11-2012 at 2-00 p.m., when CW1
N.Yashoda along with her husband CW5 Nagaraja.J.
were proceeding to see their Site No.766 allotted by
NTI Society near Ashwathappa's house, Ashwathappa
Layout, Kodigehalli, Bengaluru, the accused persons
wrongfully restrained them, abused in filthy languages
and tried to assault CW1 & 5 by hands. Thereby the
accused persons committed the aforesaid offences.
3. Accused No-1 to 4 are on bail. After
furnishing charge-sheet copies, on the basis of
materials placed before the court, charges against
accused persons for the alleged offences punishable
under Section 341 and 504 R/W 34 of IPC were
framed, read over & explained in the language known
to them. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and
claimed to be tried.
4 CC No.10810/2013
4. The prosecution in order to prove its case has
examined in all seven witnesses as PW1 to 7 and
produced documents as per Ex.P1 to 4. CW8 to 11 did
not turn up before this court inspite of coercive steps
taken by this court. Hence, in the interest of speedy
justice to the accused persons, this court dropped the
said witnesses by rejecting the prayer of learned
Sr.APP. Thereafter, the statement of accused persons,
as required U/S 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein
they have denied the incriminating evidence and opted
not to adduce any defence evidence.
5. I have heard the arguments on both sides and
perused the case file.
6. There is a major contradiction regarding the
timings of occurrence of alleged incident. As per
complaint, the alleged incident was occurred at 5.00
p.m. on 27-11-2012. But as per the statements of
witnesses and charge sheet submitted by I.O., the
5 CC No.10810/2013
alleged incident was occurred at 2.00 p.m. on 27-11-
2012.
7. The complainant Yashoda entered into the
witness box as PW1. She is one of the victims of
alleged incident dated 27-11-2012. But she has
adduced contradictory evidence inrespect of the
alleged incident and the accused persons. It is to be
noted here that at one breath, the PW1 has stated that
the accused persons herein came and abused herself &
her husband in a filthy language and attempted to
assault them near the house of one Ashwathappa. But
at another breath, she has stated that she learnt the
names of accused persons through the President and
Secretary of their NTI Housing Society and she cannot
identify the said accused persons before this court. It
is pertinent to note here that before this court, PW1
has not whispered anything about the obstructions
caused by accused persons on the said date near the
6 CC No.10810/2013
above said house of Ashwathappa. Further, the I.O.
has not made the above said Ashwathappa as witness
to the incident or the spot mahazar.
8. It is further relevant to note that though the
alleged incident was occurred on 27-11-2012 at 2.00
p.m.(as per charge sheet), a written complaint (Ex.P1)
came to lodged before the police on 28-11-2012 at
21.55 hours (9.55 p.m.). There is more than one-day
delay in lodging the complaint. Infact it is stated that
by discussing the matter with others in the Governing
Council of NTI Housing Society, Ex.P1 was lodged
before the police. But in support of the said
contention, the Meeting Proceedings of the Governing
Council of NTI Housing Society has not been
produced before the I.O./this court.
9. During cross-examination, the PW1 has
admitted that inrespect of the sites allotted by NTI
Housing Society, the cases have been filed before the
7 CC No.10810/2013
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and Hon'ble High
Court of Karnataka. Further, she has stated that there
was a crowd in the spot and she cannot say as to who
had dragged their President during the incident. The
PW1 is also a witness for the spot mahazar (Ex.P2).
But she has stated that she was not present during the
mahazar in the spot and that her husband was actually
present and she has signed the said document in the
police station. The PW1 has frankly admitted that she
cannot say the exact filthy words uttered by the
accused persons during the incident. The above
evidence of PW1 establishes that there is dispute
regarding the site properties and this witness has not
identified the accused persons during the incident and
she was not physically present at the time of drawing
spot mahazar by the police.
10. The husband of PW1 namely Nagaraj, who is
also one of the victims and the alleged eyewitnesses
8 CC No.10810/2013
namely Ramakrishna and T.S.Ravindra entered into
the witness box as PW2, 4 and 5 respectively. PW2
Nagaraj being the husband of PW1 has only identified
accused No-4 Ananda before this court. He has turned
hostile regarding the identification of remaining
accused persons and deposed that he has not given any
statement to the police as per Ex.P3 in that regard.
During cross-examination of the defence counsel,
PW2 has admitted that he has seen accused No-1 to 4
for the first time before this court and he cannot
specifically say the filthy words used by accused
persons during the incident.
11. PW4 Ramakrishna has stated that the place
of incident is a land belonging to the NTI Housing
Society and the said land is in the possession of said
Society. But during cross-examination, he has
admitted that the disputes relating to the land in
question is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court
9 CC No.10810/2013
and High Court. It is to be noticed that as per PW2,
during the incident, the family members of
Ashwathappa were not present at the spot. But as per
PW4 the family members of said Ashwathappa were
present in the spot. The PW4 has expressed his
inability to depose about the color of dress worn by
accused persons during the alleged incident. The
above contradictions in the statement of PW4 establish
that he is a tutored witness.
12. The PW5 T.S.Ravindra was the former
President of NTI Housing Society. Though he has
supported the case of prosecution during his chief
examination evidence, during cross-examination, he
has stated that he cannot say the exact date of alleged
galata and he cannot say the names of farmers present
in the spot during the alleged incident. The PW5 has
revealed that the accused persons have also given a
counter case against their Society.
10 CC No.10810/2013
13. From the above evidence of PW2, 4 and 5, it
is very clear that the present case is a concocted one
and it has been filed only to take revenge against the
accused persons and to harass them if possible.
14. The alleged spot mahazar witnesses namely
Jayaram.T. and Manjunath entered into the witness
box as PW3 and 6 respectively. Of course both
witnesses have identified the spot mahazar (Ex.P2)
and their signatures in the said document. During
cross-examination, the PW3 has stated that he has not
read the contents of Ex.P2 and five members have
signed the said document. But Ex.P2 contains the
signatures of only two witnesses and the complainant
(CW1). Similarly PW6 has stated that formerly he
was the driver of Car of the President of NTI Society.
But he has stated that he cannot say the boundaries of
the place of drawing the spot mahazar. The recitals of
Ex.P2 discloses that it was prepared on 28-11-2012 in
11 CC No.10810/2013
between 9.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. But it is the
statement of PW6 that at 8.30 a.m., he went to the spot
and at 9.00 a.m., he had gone to his duty and at 2.00
p.m. he was in the office. The above statement
indicates that in between 9.00 and 10.00 a.m., he was
not present in the spot on 28-11-2012 as recited in
Ex.P2.
15. The testimonies of PW3 and 6 doubt the
presence of these witnesses at the time of conducting
Ex.P2 by the police. The I.O. has not chosen to appear
before this court to prove the recitals of Ex.P2.
Further, it is relevant to note that as per Ex.P1, the
present case was registered on 28-11-2012 at 21.55
hours (9.55 p.m.). But the recitals of Ex.P2 mahazar
discloses that before the registration of case, the I.O.
appears to have conducted the mahazar in the spot in
between 9.00 and 10.00 a.m. on 28-11-2012. Hence, I
hold that the prosecution has failed to prove Ex.P2
12 CC No.10810/2013
beyond all reasonable doubt. In my opinion, the above
said discrepancy goes to root of the case and makes
this court to doubt the case of prosecution.
16. The erstwhile Secretary of NTI Housing Co-
Operative Society namely R.Prakash entered into the
witness box as PW7 and adduced evidence regarding
the letter issued by their Society to the I.O. as per
Ex.P4. The PW7 has stated that regarding allotment of
Site No.766 in 1st Phase at Rajiv Gandhi Nagar to
CW1, he has issued the said letter to the I.O. But
during cross-examination, he has stated that their
Society has been approved on 04-03-2010, but the
document in question inrespect of the above said site
was registered in the office of Sub-Registrar as
pending document on 31-03-2001 itself. He has
admitted that there are no documents in their Society
to show that a resolution has been passed by their
Society for the pending registration of the document
13 CC No.10810/2013
inrespect of the sites. The evidence of PW7 discloses
that still some cases are pending before the concerned
Higher Courts inrespect of the sites formed by their
society.
17. From the evidence of PW7, it appears that
there is dispute between the NTI Housing Society and
the Farmers of Locality relating to the sites in question
and the present case has been filed in order to prevent
them from pursuing their legal remedy.
18. Herein, the I.O. and other material witnesses
have not taken any interest to appear before this court
to adduce evidence regarding the overt-acts of the
accused persons. Under the circumstances, this court
is of the considered opinion that there is no sufficient,
legal, corroborative and concrete evidence on record to
prove the guilt of the accused persons, beyond all
reasonable doubt. On the whole, this court is of the
view that accused persons are entitled for the said
14 CC No.10810/2013
benefit of doubt. In the result, I proceed to pass the
following-
ORDER
The accused No-1 to 4 are found not guilty. Hence acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., they are acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 341, 504 R/W 34 of IPC.
Their bail bonds stand cancelled and they are set at liberty. (Dictated to the Stenographer on Computer. The computerized print out taken by him is revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this day i.e., 20-02-2017) (Rudolph Pereira), Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, BENGALURU.
15 CC No.10810/2013ANNEXURE List of Witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution:-
PW1 : N.Yashoda
PW2 : Nagaraj
PW3 : Jayaram.T.
PW4 : Ramakrishna
PW5 : T.S.Ravindra
PW6 : Manjunath
PW7 : R.Prakash
List of Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:-
Ex.P1 : Complaint
Ex.P2 : Spot Mahazar
Ex.P3 : Statement of PW2
Ex.P4 : Letter dated 06-2-2013
of the NTI Housing
Co-Operative Society Ltd. addressed to the SHO of Kodigehalli P.S. List of Material objects produced:-
NIL List of Witnesses examined & documents marked on behalf of the defence:
NIL C.M.M., BENGALURU. 16 CC No.10810/2013 20-02-2017 (Judgment pronounced in the open court vide separate sheets) ORDER The accused No-1 to 4 are found not guilty. Hence acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C., they are acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 341, 504 R/W 34 of IPC.
Their bail bonds stand cancelled and they are set at liberty.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.