Bangalore District Court
The State Rep. By vs Smt. Sunitha Singh on 12 July, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE VI ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY
DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF JULY 2016
PRESENT :SRI LAXMAN RAMU KURANE
B.Com.,LL.B.
VI ADDL. C.M.M., BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT UNDER SECTION 355 OF Cr.P.C.
Case No. : CC.No.15044/2016
Date of offence : 4-5-2016
Complainant : The State rep. by
PSI of HSR Layout PS
Accused : Smt. Sunitha Singh
W/o Chandraprakash
Aged about 32 Yrs
R/at No.18, Bloomdale
Layout, Behind Bata Show
Room, Kykondrahalli,
Bangalore.
Offence : U/s.326 of IPC
Plea : Accused pleaded
not guilty
Final order : Accused is acquitted
Date of Order : 12-7-2016.
** ** **
2 CC.No.15044/2016
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS
The Police Sub Inspector of HSR Layout
Police Station submitted charge sheet against
the accused for the offence punishable U/s.326
of IPC.
2. Accused is the wife of CW.1, they are
residing in the building of Srinivas Reddy on
the 2nd floor. On 4-5-2016 at about night 11-00PM
the CW.1 came to house after completing his
work, at that time the accused was chatting in
the mobile. The CW.1 questioned the accused
regarding chatting in the mobile, for that the
accused went inside kitchen brought the knife
and assulted the CW.1 on his left hand and
caused grievous injury. On the basis of first
information statement lodged by CW.1, FIR has
been registered at Cr.No.351/2016 of
HSR Layout Police station.
3 CC.No.15044/2016
3. During the course of investigation
accused was arrested and produced before the
court. Thereafter accused was enlarged on bail.
4. After submission of charge sheet
cognizance of the offence has taken. Copy of the
charge sheet was furnished as contemplated
U/s.207 of Cr.P.C. Charge was framed. Accused
pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. CWs.1 to 8 witnesses have been cited in
the charge sheet. During the course of the trial
CW.1 was examined as PW-1, EX.P--1 and 2 got
marked.
6. After closing the prosecution side
evidence, since there is no incriminating
materials found against the accused, recording
statement U/s.313 of Cr.P.C is dispensed with.
Accused did not adduce any defence evidence.
4 CC.No.15044/2016
7. Heard argument of Sr.APP and learned
counsel for the accused.
8. The CW.1 in his examination-in-chief
stated that after the marriage there were some
misunderstanding between him and accused for
that reason he lodged police complaint against
accused. The Learned Sr.APP made cross-
examination of PW.1, as he turned hostile in his
cross-examination the PW.1 stated that he and
accused were compromised the matter and now
residing together. Taking into consideration the
settlement between the parties, it is not proper
to convict the accused. Moreover, prosecution
failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt.
9. In the result, I proceed to pass the
following:-
5 CC.No.15044/2016
ORDER
Accused is not found guilty for the offence punishable U/s.326 of IPC. Accused is acquitted U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bond of the accused stands cancelled.
(Dictated to the stenographer, transcript thereof, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court this the 12th day of July 2016).
(LAXMAN RAMU KURANE) VI Addl.C.M.M. Bengaluru city.
Annexure
1. Witnesses examined for the prosecution:
PW-1 Chandraprakash Singh.
2.Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:
Ex.P-1 Complaint Ex.P-2 Mahazar.
3. Material objects:
Nil.
VI ADDL.C.M.M.Bengaluru CITY. 6 CC.No.15044/2016 (Judgment pronounced in the open court) ORDER Accused is not found guilty for the offence punishable U/s.326 of IPC. Accused is acquitted U/s.248(1) Cr.P.C. The bail bond of the accused stands cancelled.
(Vide Separate Order) VI Addl.C.M.M., Bangalore. 7 CC.No.15044/2016 8 CC.No.15044/2016 (Judgment pronounced in the open court) ORDER (Vide Separate Order) VI Addl.C.M.M., Bangalore. 9 CC.No.15044/2016