Bangalore District Court
4. Name Of The Accused 1. Smt. Gowramma vs To 5 Are Acquitted on 5 August, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE VIII ADDL. C.M.M.,BANGALORE.
Dated this the 5th day of August 2015.
Present : Sri.D. Puttaswamy, B.A., LL.B.
VIII ADDL. C.M.M., BANGALORE.
CC No. 10282/2013
JUDGMENT U/S 355 OF THE Cr.P.C. 1973.
1. Sl. No. of the Case 10282/2013
2. The date of 22.04.2012
commission of the
offence
3. Name of the State by Sanjayangar P. S.
complainant
4. Name of the accused 1. Smt. Gowramma,
W/o. Mariswamy Gowda,
52 years, R/at No.118/B 4th
Cross, Ashwathnagara,
Bangalore.
2. Mahendra Kumar
S/o. Mariswamy Gowda, 28
years, No.118/B 4th Cross,
Ashwathnagara, Bangalore.
2
3.Shankaregowda
Aged about 40 years
C/o. No.118/B 4th Cross,
Ashwathnagara, Bangalore.
4. Smt. Pushpa,
W/o. Shankaregowda,
R/at. No.118/B 4th Cross,
Ashwathnagara, Bangalore.
5.Smt. Shivamma,
R/at No.118/B, 4th Cross,
Ashwathnagara, Bangalore.
5. The offence U/sec. 323, 504, 506 R/w 34 of
complained of or IPC.
proved
6. Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
and his examination
7. Final Order Acting U/sec. 248(1) Cr.PC
Accused-1 to 5 are acquitted.
8. Date of such order 05/08/2015
For the following:-
JUDGMENT
This is the charge sheet filed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Sanjayangar P. S. against the accused-1 to 5 for the offences punishable U/sec., 323, 504, 506 R/w 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that: 3
Accused -1 to 5 in furtherance of common intention to commit an offence picked up quarrel with CW.1 at House No. 118/B, situated at RMV II Stage, Ashwathnagar, within jurisdiction of Sanjay Nagar P.S. with regard to property matter and in the above said transaction assaulted CW.1 with their hands on the body of CW.1 thus voluntarily caused hurt, abused CW.1 in filthy language knowingly such insult will provoke breach of peace and threatened CW.1 and 2 with dire consequences thus committed criminal intimidation and thereby committed the alleged offences.
3. Accused -1 to 5 are on bail. As required u/sec.207 of Cr.PC, the copies of the charge sheet papers were furnished to the accused. The accused on framing the charges, denied the charges and thereupon the prosecution was directed to lead the evidence on its side to prove the allegations. As such the prosecution examined PW:1 and got marked Ex.P.1 and 2. On closure of the prosecution evidence, as there was no incriminating 4 evidence against the accused, the statement of the accused u/sec.313 Cr.PC is dispensed with.
4. I have heard the arguments from both the sides .
5. The following points that arise for my consideration are:
1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that at House No. 118/B, situated at RMV II Stage, Ashwathnagar, within jurisdiction of Sanjay Nagar P.S., accused-1 to 5 have committed the offences punishable U/sec.323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC.?
2) What order?
6. My finding on the above points are held as under:
Point No.1 In the negative Point No.2 As per final order for the following:5
REASONS
7. Point No.1:-
In order to bring home the guilt of accused, the prosecution has examined PW.1. PW.1 has turned hostile in toto to the case of the prosecution. PW.1, who being the complainant in her evidence deposed that, accused have not assaulted her with hands, not abused her in filthy language and not given any life threat to her. PW.1 further deposed that she has not given complaint before the police as per Ex.P1 and police have not drawn mahazar as per Ex.P2.
8. Even in the cross-examination by learned Sr.APP, PW.1 has not supported the case of the prosecution. In the cross- examination PW.1 has specifically denied for having given complaint and police have drawn mahazar. This being the evidence of PW.1, it is fatal to the case of the prosecution.
9. Even though learned Sr.APP prayed for issuance of summons to other witnesses. As PW.1 being the material 6 witness/victim has not supported the case of the prosecution, mere issuance of summons to other witnesses and examination of those witnesses would not serve the purpose of the prosecution and hence prayer of learned Sr.APP is rejected.
10. In the absence of cogent, corroborative and material evidence, it is not safe to come to conclusion that prosecution has proved the allegations against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, I answer point no.1 in the negative.
11. Point No.2:- In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section-248(1) of Cr.P.C., accused-1 to 5 are hereby acquitted of the offences punishable U/sec.323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC.7
Bail bonds of accused and their surety bonds stand cancelled.
(Dictated to the stenographer, transcript thereof, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court this the August 5, 2015.) (D. Puttaswamy) VIII Addl.C.M.M. Bangalore.
Annexure:
1.List of Witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution: P. Ws:
1. M.S.Jyothi.
2.List of Documents marked on behalf of the prosecution:- Ex.Ps:
1. Complaint
2. Mahazar
3.List of Material objects marked on behalf of the prosecution:-
-NIL -
4.List of witnesses and documents marked on behalf of the accused: -NIL -
VIII Addl. C. M. M. Bangalore.