Bangalore District Court
Hebbala P S vs A1 Mohanakumara R on 13 February, 2024
1
SC.No.603/2021
KABC010114172021
Presented on : 05-06-2021
Registered on : 05-06-2021
Decided on : 13-02-2024
Duration : 2 years, 8 months, 8 days
IN THE COURT OF LXV ADDL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-66)
PRESENT
SHRI. HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R ,
B.A.L., L.L.B.,
LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
Dated this the 13 th day of February, 2024
S.C.No.603/2021
COMPLAINANT/S:- STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Hebbal Police station,
Bengaluru.
(Rep. by Public Prosecutor)
Vs.
ACCUSED:- 1. MOHANAKUMARA. R
[Abated]
2. YADUSHREE,
w/o Mohan Kumar. R
Aged about 39 years,
R/o No.72, Ground Floor,
1st Cross, Manorayanapalya,
R.T. Nagar Post, Bengaluru - 560 032.
[Accused No.2].
(A2 by Sri.JDS., Advocate)
2
SC.No.603/2021
Date of Commencement of 24.05.2020
offences
Date of report of offences 27.05.2020
Name of complainant Sri. Srinivas
Date of recording of evidence 14.03.2023
Date of closing of evidence 18.11.2023
Offence complained of U/s.307, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w
Section 34 of IPC
Opinion of the judge Acquitted
*****
JUDGMENT
This charge sheet is submitted by Police Sub-Inspector, Hebbal police station against the accused No.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the case.-
The complainant has lodged complaint alleging that on 23.05.2020 night at about 10.45 hours, the complainant and his wife were standing in the balcony after finishing the dinner, at that time three unknown persons were standing near the bike of the complainant, his wife shouted for help. Immediately, the complainant took the bike inside the gate. Thereafter, on 24.05.2020 evening his brother was washing the camera that was installed to the wall, and he went down to bring water and at the same time his wife also came down to bring water. It is alleged that the accused abused her in a foul language 'ಹಳ ನರಸಪರದ ಸಳ' and also assaulted on her head and other parts of the body. When he went for her help the accused No.1 stabbed him with knife and when his wife came for his rescue the wife of the 3 SC.No.603/2021 accused No.1 assaulted her with Bat on her head. Thereafter, his neighbours took him to the hospital. Alleging the same the complainant has lodged the complaint. The police on receipt of the said complaint have registered the case in Crime No.82/2020 for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC.
3. After investigation the police have filed the charge sheet against the accused No.1 and 2 in CC.No.3513/2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC. The trial court after securing the presence of the accused No.1 and 2 have committed the case to Prl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru and later the case has been made over to this court in SC.No.603/2021 and with respect to death of accused No.1 the case against the accused No.1 stands abated. This court after securing the accused No.2 framed the charges against the accused and explained to the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC, however the accused pleaded not guilty of the charges leveled against him and claimed to be tried, hence the trial was conducted.
4. The prosecution to prove their case has totally cited 14 witnesses i.e., CW1 to CW14. However, the prosecution was able to secure and examine only 8 witnesses as PW1 to PW8 and got marked the documents at Ex.P1 to Ex.P13 and also identified MO.1 to MO.5. The prosecution was able to secure and examine only CW1, CW4, CW5, CW8, CW11 to CW14. The proclamation issued against CW2, CW3, CW6 and CW7 was duly published, hence the evidence of CW2, CW3, CW6 and CW7 are dropped and the prayer of learned Public Prosecutor to issue summons to CW15 is rejected. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the statement of accused No.2 under Section 4 SC.No.603/2021 313 of Cr.P.C., was recorded. The accused No.2 denied the incriminating evidence appearing against her, was read over and explained to the accused No.2. However, she has totally denied the incriminating evidence appearing against her and she has not chosen to lead any defense evidence on her behalf.
5. Heard the arguments. The points that arise for my consideration.-
1. Whether the prosecution beyond all reasonable doubt proves that on 23.5.2020 night at about 10.45 hours, the abated accused No.1 along with accused No.2 in furtherance of their common intention and with the knowledge that by their act they are going to cause the death of PW1, tried to assault PW1 with Bat and knife and thereby committed an offence of attempt to murder punishable under Section 307 r/w Section 34 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the abated accused No.1 along with accused No.2 in prosecution of their common object, assaulted PW1 with bat and knife and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 324 r/w Section 34 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the abated accused No.1 along with accused No.2 in prosecution of their common object, assaulted PW1 and caused hurt thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 324 r/w Section 34 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the abated accused 5 SC.No.603/2021 No.1 along with accused No.2 in prosecution of their common object, abused PW1 in the foul language and insulted his wife and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 504 r/w Section 34 of IPC?
5. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused persons in prosecution of their common object, threatened PW1 and PW2 and also put him life threat and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC?
6. What Order?
6. My findings on the above said points are as under.-
Point No.1:- In the Negative
Point No.2:- In the Negative
Point No.3:- In the Negative
Point No.4:- In the Negative
Point No.5:- In the Negative
Point No.6:- As per the final order
for the following
REASONS
7. Points No.1 to 5: - Since these points are interconnected with each other, for the sake of convenience, I would like to take these points together for common consideration.
8. The complainant has lodged complaint alleging that on 23.05.2020 night at about 10.45 hours, the complainant and his wife were standing in the balcony after finishing the dinner, at that time three unknown persons were standing near the bike of the complainant, his wife shouted for help. Immediately, the complainant took the bike 6 SC.No.603/2021 inside the gate. Thereafter, on 24.05.2020 evening his brother was washing the camera that was installed to the wall, and he went down to bring water and at the same time his wife also came down to bring water. It is alleged that the accused abused her in a foul language 'ಹಳ ನರಸಪರದ ಸಳ' and also assaulted on her head and other parts of the body. When he went for her help the accused No.1 stabbed him with knife and when his wife came for his rescue the wife of the accused No.1 assaulted her with Bat on her head. Thereafter, his neighbours took him to the hospital. Alleging the same the complainant has lodged the complaint. The police on receipt of the said complaint have registered the case in Crime No.82/2020 for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC.
9. The prosecution in support of their case have examined CW1, CW4, CW5, CW8, CW11 to CW14 to prove the guilt of the accused as PW1 to PW8. In the present case CW1- the complainant is examined as PW1, CW4 -eye witness is examined as PW2, CW5 - panch witness is examined as PW3, CW8- mahazar witness is examined as PW4, CW11- the police official is examined as PW5, CW13- the police officer is examined as PW6, CW14- IO is examined as PW7 and CW12 - the doctor is examined as PW8. The proclamation issued against CW2, CW3, CW6 and CW7 was duly published, hence the evidence of CW2, CW3, CW6 and CW7 are dropped and the prayer of learned Public Prosecutor to issue summons to CW15 is rejected.
10. CW1- Srinivas. R - the complainant /victim is examined as PW1 wherein PW1 has deposed that the accused is his brother's wife and he does not have any information about this case and his brother accused No.1 in this case is dead and he does not have any 7 SC.No.603/2021 information about what was the accused doing and the police have not conducted any panchanama in his presence and he cannot identify the bat and knife which alleged to have been used for assaulting on him by the accused and he cannot identify the knife and he has identified his signature in the complaint and the said complaint is marked as Ex.P1 and his signature as Ex.P1(a) and he has signed on Ex.P1 in the hospital and also identified his signature in the spot panchanama and said spot panchanama is marked as Ex.P2 and his signature as Ex.P2(a) and he does not know about the contents of said Ex.P2 and he has signed his signature in Ex.P2 at the hospital. The learned Public Prosecutor having treated the said witness as hostile, has cross- examined PW1 wherein PW1 has denied the suggestions that on 24.05.2020, himself and his brother had a tussle regarding the camera, at that time the accused No.2 abused him and CW4 in a foul language. PW1 has denied the suggestion that the accused No.1 abused CW4 in a foul language as 'ಹಳ ನರಸಪರದ ಸಳ' and thereafter assaulted on back and chest with his hand and caused pain and at that time the accused No.1 and 2 have pushed him and his wife on the road and accused No.1 with an intention to kill him stabbed on the abdomen with knife and caused bleeding injuries and when CW2 came for his rescue, the accused No.2 assaulted her with Bat and caused bleeding injuries and also the accused No.1 and 2 have threatened him, CW4 and CW2 with their lives and he has given complaint as per Ex.P1. PW1 has denied the suggestion that on 30.05.2020, the police have conducted spot panchanama as per Ex.P2 from 10.15 to 11.35 am., in the said place at house No.72, Manorayana Palya and at that time the police have seized bloodstained blue colour shirt, baniyan and blue and white colour bloodstained towel for the purpose of investigation. PW1 has denied the suggestion that he has given further statement to the police 8 SC.No.603/2021 on 23.12.2020 and part of the said statement is marked as Ex.P3. PW1 has denied the suggestion that he has complete informant about the case and he has given statement before the police as per Ex.P3 even though he is deposing falsely to help the accused because he requested him.
11. CW4- Annapurna.S., is examined as PW2 wherein PW2 has deposed that the accused is her husband brother's wife and she does not have any information about this case and her husband's brother accused No.1 in this case is dead and she does not have any information about what was the accused doing and the police have not conducted any panchanama in her presence and in this regard she has not given any statement. The learned Public Prosecutor having treated the said witness as hostile, has cross-examined PW2 wherein PW2 has denied the suggestions that in the evening on 24.05.2020, there was a fight between CW1 and his brother regarding the camera and at that time the accused No.2 abused her and CW1 in a foul language. PW2 has denied the suggestion that the accused No.1 abused her in a foul language as 'ಹಳ ನರಸಪರದ ಸಳ' and thereafter assaulted on back and chest with his hand and caused pain and at that time the accused No.1 and 2 have pushed her and her husband on the road and accused No.1 with an intention to kill him stabbed on the abdomen with knife and caused bleeding injuries and when she came for rescue, the accused No.2 assaulted her with Bat and caused bleeding injuries and also the accused No.1 and 2 have threatened her and CW1 with their lives and she has given statement in this regard and she wrote the complaint in this case. PW2 has denied the suggestion that she has given further statement to the police on 08.09.2020 and part of the said statement is marked as Ex.P4. PW2 has denied the suggestion that she has 9 SC.No.603/2021 complete informant about the case and she has given statement before the police as per Ex.P4 even though she is deposing falsely to help the accused because she requested him.
12. CW5-Jagadish is examined as PW3 wherein PW3 has deposed that the accused is his brother's wife and CW1 is his brother, CW4 is his sister-in-law and he does not have any information about this case and he has not given any statement before the police and he does not have any information how the incident happened and CW1 did not say thing before him. The learned Public Prosecutor having treated the said witness as hostile, has cross-examined PW3 wherein PW3 has denied the suggestions that on 24.05.2020 evening at 6.50 pm., CW1 came to his house with a towel wrapped around the right side of his stomach and CW1 has explained the detail of the incident and in the evening 24.05.2020, himself and his brother had a tussle regarding the camera at that time the accused No.2 abused him and CW4 in a foul language. PW3 has denied the suggestion that the accused No.1 abused CW4 in a foul language as 'ಹಳ ನರಸಪರದ ಸಳ' and thereafter assaulted on back and chest with his hand and caused pain and at that time the accused No.1 and 2 have pushed him and CW4 on the road and accused No.1 with an intention to kill him stabbed on the abdomen with knife and caused bleeding injuries and when CW4 came for his rescue, the accused No.2 assaulted her with Bat and caused bleeding injuries and also the accused No.1 and 2 have threatened him, CW4 and CW2 with their lives and he has given statement about this on 08.09.2020. PW3 has denied the suggestion that he has given statement before the police as per Ex.P5. PW3 has denied the suggestion that he has complete informant about the case and he has given statement before the police as per Ex.P5 even though he is 10 SC.No.603/2021 deposing falsely to help the accused because the accused requested him.
13. CW8- Sudhakar is examined as PW4 wherein PW4 has deposed that he does not have any information about this case and he has not seen the incident and he has not given any statement before the police. The learned Public Prosecutor having treated the said witness as hostile, has cross-examined PW4 wherein PW4 has denied the suggestions that on 24.05.2020 at 6.30 pm., there was a altercation between Srinivas and Mohan Kumar and the accused abused Srinivas and Annapurna in a foul language and also threatened their lives and Mohan Kumar took out a knife with an intention to kill Srinivas, stabbed it in the right stomach of Srinivas and caused bleeding injuries and the accused No.2 with an intention to kill, has assaulted with Bat and at that time Divya and Sunil Kumar have pacify the quarrel and later seeing oozing blood coming from Srinivas's stomach Vinay gave him a towel and later he took CW1 to the hospital on his bike and he has seen the incident even though he is deposing falsely to help the accused and about this he has given statement on 23.12.2020. PW4 has denied the suggestion that he has given statement before the police as per Ex.P6. PW4 has denied the suggestion that he has complete informant about the case and he has given statement before the police as per Ex.P6 even though he is deposing falsely to help the accused because the accused requested him.
14. CW11- Harish is examined as PW5 wherein PW5 has deposed that from 2020 to till he is working as Police Constable in Hebbal police station. PW5 has deposed that on 23.05.2020, he and CW10 were appointed for night duty in the 3 rd beat and accordingly, they patrolled near Manorayanapalaya, 1st Cross, House No. 73 in the 11 SC.No.603/2021 beat and when they arrived at 10.55 pm., Srinivas came down from the said house and shouting that some three persons used to come to their house on a bike and push their windows and doors which his wife saw and told that they ran away from there and they beat the roads side by side they did not find anyone so they informed the matter to SHO.
15. PW5 has been cross-examined by the accused counsel wherein PW5 has admitted that there is about 3.5 km., from Manorayapalya 1st Cross, House No.73 to their station and there are many houses next to the said house. PW5 has denied the suggestion tht on 23.05.2020, he and CW10 were not appointed by the SHO of their station for night duty beat No.3 and have not gone near Manorayanapalaya, 1st Cross, House No.73 and Srinivas, who was in the said house, shouted and came down and some three persons came to their house on a bike and pushed their window doors and they did not inform the SHO of their station and he has no information about the said case even though as per the instructions of the higher officers he is deposing falsely.
16. CW13-A.M. Venkatesh is examined as PW6 wherein PW6 has deposed that from 2019 to May 2021 he is working as Assistant Sub-Inspector in Hebbal police station. PW6 has deposed that on 27.05.2020, he was on day duty and at that time he received MLC intimation from Bapist hospital about the admission of Srinivasa to the said hospital and he has sent HC-Andani to Bapist hospital to get the statement of injured and the said HC-Andani took the statement of the victim at 8-00 pm., and produced it before him and on the basis of the said statement he has registered FIR in Crime No.82/2020 under Sections 302, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and submitted the FIR to the court and higher officials. PW6 has identified his 12 SC.No.603/2021 signature in the complaint and the said complaint is already marked as Ex.P1 and his signature as Ex.P1(b) and also identified his signature in the FIR and the said FIR is marked as Ex.P7 and his signature as Ex.P7(a). PW6 has deposed that on 30.05.2020, the place where the incident took place No.72, Manorayapalya, 1st Cross, the place shown by the complainant and the clothes given by him i.e. blue color full sleeve shirt, one white bloodstained banyan, one blue & white checks bloodstained towel were seized in presence of CW2 and CW3 and sealed it and stamped with the letter HBL on it and conducted panchanama from 10.15 to 11.30 am., and also he has entered seized articles in PF No.59/2020 and one blue color full sleeve shirt is identified as MO.1, one white coloured bloodstained baniyan identified as MO.2, one blue & white colour checks bloodstained towel is identified as MO.3 and PW6 has identified his signature in the said panchanama and the said panchanama is already marked as Ex.P2 and his signature as Ex.P2(b). PW6 has deposed that on 30.05.2020, he has issued notice to CW1 -Srinivas to produce the documents and thereafter he has entrusted the further investigation to CW14.
17. PW6 has been cross-examined by the accused counsel wherein PW6 has denied the suggestion that Srinivas has not admitted to the said Baptist hospital on 27.05.2020 and no MLC intimation has been received from the said hospital and he has not received MLC intimation and the HC- Andani was not sent to get the victim's statement and HC Andani has not obtained any statement and produced it before him and on the basis of that he has not registered any FIR as per Ex.P7. PW6 has denied the suggestion that he has not conducted any mahazar at the place on 30.05.2020 and CW1 has not shown any place and produced his belongings and further denied the suggestion 13 SC.No.603/2021 that he has not seized the material produced by CW1 at the said place in presence of CW2 and CW3 and has not been sealed. PW6 has admitted that he has not given written notice to CW2 and CW3 and further denied the suggestion that he has prepared the said panchanama in the police station.
18. CW14-Rajesh V.M., is examined as PW7 wherein PW7 has deposed that from December, 2017 to May, 2021 he is working as Police Sub-Inspector in Hebbal police station. PW7 has deposed that he has received the case file from CW13 on 30.05.2020 and verified it and started further investigation and on the same day he has recorded the statement of CW10 and CW11. PW7 has deposed that he has received wound certificate of CW1 from CW13 on 13.06.2020 and PW7 has identical the wound certificate and said wound certificate is marked as Ex.P8 and his signature as Ex.P8(a). PW7 has deposed that on 08.09.2020 he has recorded the statement of CW4 and CW5. PW7 has deposed that on 09.12.2020, the accused No.1 and 2 appeared before the station where they obtained anticipatory bail from Hon'ble Court and he has obtained the voluntary statement of the said accused and then as per the court order he has obtained the written letter from the accused and release them and further deposed that the accused No.1 and 2 have stated in their voluntary statement that at the time of assaulting CW1 and CW2, they had hidden the bat and knife used for the alleged act under the bed in the bedroom of their residence and in their voluntary statement, they have said that if they comes with them they will show the place where the weapons are hidden and the part of the said statements are marked as Ex.P9 and Ex.P10 and their signature as Ex.P9(a) and Ex.P10(a) and he can identify the accused and also PW7 has identified the accused who are present before the 14 SC.No.603/2021 court. PW7 has deposed that on 10.12.2020, he brought CW6 and CW7 to the police station and showed the accused No.1 and 2 and explained about the incident and visited the place where the accused showed the place and seized the material objects under amanath panchanama and thereafter he has subjected the material objects in station PF.No.107/2020, 10' long knife with dried bloodstain and a bat about 2.5 feet long and he has put the said material objects separately in a white colour cloth bag and sealed it with English letter HBL and affixed a slip with his signature and panchas signature on it. PW7 has identified his signature in the said amanath panchanama and the same is marked as Ex.P11 and his signature as Ex.P11(a). 10' long knife with dried bloodstain is identified as MO.4 and a bat about 2.5 feet long is identified as MO.5 and on the same day he has recorded the statements of CW6 and CW7. P W7 has deposed that on 18.12.2020 he has sent PF.No.59/2020 and 107/2020 to FSL through CW12 and received the report and PW7 has identified his signature on the passport issued to CW12 and the same is marked as EX.P12 and his signature as Ex.P12(a). PW7 has identified his signature in the report given by CW12 and the same is marked as Ex.P13 and his signature as Ex.P13(a). PW7 has deposed that he has recorded the statements of CW1 to CW3 and CW8 on 23.12.2020 and further deposed that since the investigation is completed he has submitted the charge sheet before to the court and there is nothing more to say in this case. The learned Public Prosecutor having treated the said witness as hostile, has cross-examined PW7 wherein PW7 has admitted that on 10.12.2020, the accused showed the ground floor, new house No.64, old No.31, 1st Cross, Manorayanapalaya, within the limits of Hebbal police station. PW7 has admitted that the accused No.1 went into the bedroom of the house and brought a knife and produced it and found 15 SC.No.603/2021 dried bloodstains on the said knife and further admitted that the accused No.2 has produced a bat of 2.5 feet length and he has conducted Ex.P11 - panchanama from 10.35 to 11.50 am.,
19. PW7 has been cross-examined by the accused counsel wherein PW7 has denied the suggestion that on 09.12.2020 accused No.1 and 2 have not attend the police station and they have not given any voluntary statement as per Ex.P9 and Ex.P10 which he has created the said Ex.P9 and Ex.P10 for the said case. PW7 has denied the signature that the accused No.2 has not given any voluntary statement and as per her statement the accused No.2 has not produced any bat before him and he has not seized the said bat under Ex.P11. PW7 has admitted that no written notice is given to CW6 and CW7. PW7 has denied the suggestion that he has not conducted Ex.P11 amanath panchanama at the spot and has not seized any articles under the said panchanama. PW7 has denied the suggestion that he has prepared the said panchanama at the police station and CW4 to CW11 have not any statements before him which he has created them for the said case and during the investigation no evidence was found against the accused even though he has submitted a false charge sheet against the accused.
20. CW12 - is examined as PW8 wherein PW8 has deposed that from 2019 to till now he is working as Head Constable in Hebbal police station. PW8 has deposed that he had day duty on 18.12.2020 and CW14 deputed him for duty of seized articles in Crime No.82/2020 under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC case to FSL and received the acknowledgment and produced it before CW14 and given a report. PW8 has deposed that he can identify the said passport and PW8 has identified the said passport and the same is marked as Ex.P12 and he 16 SC.No.603/2021 can identify the FIR which he has registered and the said FIR is already marked as Ex.P13 and his signature as Ex.P13(b).
21. PW8 has been cross-examined by the accused counsel wherein PW8 has admitted that he does not know what the articles given to the said FSL and further denied the suggestion that he is not appointed for duty by CW14 to give the articles to FSL on 18.12.2020, accordingly he has not given any articles to FSL and receive the acknowledgment and no articles have been given to FLS even though he is deposing falsely to help CW14 and given a false report as per Ex.P13.
22. On perusal of the records it is noticed that the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused have examined PW1 to PW8. CW1 is examined as PW1, CW4 is examined as PW2, CW5 is examined as PW3, CW8 is examined as PW4, CW11 is examined as PW5, CW13 is examined as PW6, CW14 is examined as PW7 and CW12 is examined as PW8. On perusal of the entire records, the prosecution have examined PW1 to PW8 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P13 in support of their case. PW1 is the complainant/victim, PW2 is also the victim, and PW2 and PW4 are the eye witnesses, PW3 is the panch witness, PW5 is the police official, PW6 is the police officer, who has registered the case and conducted panchanama and also seized the bloodstained clothes of the complainant, PW7 is the Investigating officer who has made investigation, recording the statement of witnesses and has filed the charge sheet and PW8 is the police official who had given the seized articles to FSL. The prosecution except examining the said witnesses no other independent witnesses have been examined. CW2, CW3, CW6 and CW7 evidence was dropped as the said witnesses were not 17 SC.No.603/2021 secured by the prosecution, in spite of issuance of summons, warrant and also prosecution having taken proclamation against the said witnesses, the evidence of said witnesses were dropped and in spite of providing sufficient opportunities, In the present case PW1 who is the victim/ complainant has turned hostile to the case of the prosecution where he has not deposed about the incident nor has identified the articles which the police had seized during the course of investigation. The said PW1 was treated as hostile and has cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor, though cross-examined nothing has been elicited from the mouth of PW1 to prove the guilt of the accused. PW2 is also being the victim, PW2 and PW4 who have cited as eye witnesses to the said incident wherein the said PW2 and PW4 have turned hostile to the case of the prosecution and they have deposed that they does not know anything about the case nor they have given statement to the police. PW2 has deposed that she has not been assaulted with Bat and identified the weapon nor the accused persons. The learned Public Prosecutor having treated the said witnesses as hostile, has cross-examined PW2 and PW4 nothing has been elicited from the mouth of PW2 and PW4 to prove the guilt of the accused. PW3 is the panch witness who has turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. Though the learned Public Prosecutor has cross- examined the said witness nothing nothing has been elicited from the mouth of PW3 to prove the guilt of the accused, PW5 who is police official wherein he has deposed that he has deputed for night beat duty and also deposed with respect to the incident. PW6 is the police officer wherein he has deposed that he received MLC intimation from Bapist hospital about the admission of Srinivasa to the said hospital and received the statement of injured from the Bapist hospital and on the basis of the said statement he has registered FIR in Crime No.82/2020 18 SC.No.603/2021 under Sections 302, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and submitted the FIR to the court and higher officials and also seized the bloodstained clothes from the complainant and thereafter he has entrusted the further investigation to CW14. PW7 who is the Investigating officer wherein he has deposed that he has received the case file from CW13 on 30.05.2020 and conducted further investigation and has recorded the statement of CW10 and CW11 and also deposed that he has received wound certificate of CW1 from CW13 on 13.06.2020 and recorded the statement of CW4 and CW5. PW7 has deposed that he has obtained the voluntary statement of the said accused and also seized the material objects under panchanama and thereafter he has subjected the material objects in station PF.No.107/2020. PW8 is the police official wherein he has deposed that CW14 has deputed him for duty of seized articles in Crime No.82/2020 under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 of IPC case to FSL and received the acknowledgment and produced it before CW14 and given a report. In the present case CW2, CW3, CW6 and CW7 being eye witnesses/ mahazar witnesses to the incident have remained absent and the prosecution has failed to secure the presence of the said witnesses before the court in spite of providing sufficient opportunities to the prosecution to secure the said witnesses. The prosecution having failed to secure the said witnesses in spite of summons and warrant. The evidence of CW2, CW3, CW6 and CW7 was dropped as the said witness having not been examined and other witnesses and the complainant and other eye witnesses and panch witnesses having turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. The evidence of PW5 to PW8 being the police officials is not of much importance as PW1 to PW4 have turned hostile to the case of the prosecution and PW1 and PW2 being the victims and PW4 who have 19 SC.No.603/2021 cited as eye witnesses to the said incident have also turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. As such the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused that the accused No.2 has assaulted the CW1 and CW4. The evidence on record is not enough to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused, as such the accused No.2 is entitled for the benefit of doubt. Accordingly, I answer points No.1 to 4 in the 'Negative'.
23. Point No.6:- For the above reasons, I proceed to pass the following.-
ORDER Acting under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C., accused No.2 is acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
The bail bonds and surety bonds of accused No.2 shall stand cancelled.
Note:- MO.1 to 5 being worthless are ordered to be destroyed after the statutory appeal period is over.
The personal bond and surety bond of the accused No.1 and 2 shall remain in force for a period of six months as per Section 437(A) of Cr.P.C.
(Dictated to the Stenographer online directly on the computer, computerized by her, the same is corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 13th day of February, 2024) (HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R) LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
20SC.No.603/2021 ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION:-
PW1 : Venkatesh PW2 : Krishna PW3 : Kavya PW4 : Shakeel PW5 : Suresh PW6 : Mani LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION:- Ex.P1 : Complaint Ex.P2 : Spot panchanama Ex.P3 : Statement of PW1 Ex.P4 : Statement of PW2 Ex.P5 : Statement of PW3 Ex.P6 : Statement of PW4 Ex.P7 : FIR Ex.P8 : Wound certificate Ex.P9 & 10 : Voluntary statement of accused Ex.P11 : Amanath panchanama Ex.P12 : Passport Ex.P13 : Report
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF DEFENCE:-
-Nil-
LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED:-
MO.1 : Full selves Shirt
21
SC.No.603/2021
MO.2 : Baniyan
MO.3 : Towel
MO.4 : Knife
MO.5 : Bat
(HEMANTH KUMAR. C.R)
LXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.