Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Bangalore District Court

State By Ashoknagar Police Station vs Vinod @ L.Aquinas Vinu on 10 January, 2022

          IN THE COURT OF THE XXIX ADDL.C.M.M
               MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU
                Dated: The 10th January 2022
                PRESENT: Sri. G.R.KULKARNI,
                                         B.A.(LAW)., LL.B.,
                XXIX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

                         C.C.No.54989/2021

COMPLAINANT :-                      State by Ashoknagar Police Station

                                    (By Sr.APP)

ACCUSED :-                              Vinod @ L.Aquinas Vinu,
                                        s/o. Lukas
                                        Aged 26 years,
                                        R/at.55/5, 7th Cross,
                                         Rose Garden, Neelasandra,
                                         Bengaluru.
                                         (By Smt.Triveni.R., Advocate)


DATE OF COMMENCEMENT                                28.10.2021
OF EVIDENCE

DATE OF CLOSING OF                                  28.10.2021
EVIDENCE

DATE OF JUDGMENT                                    10.01.2022

                             JUDGMENT

This is a final report filed by the PSI of Ashoknagar P.S against the accused for the offence punishable u/s.324 of Indian Penal Code.

2. BRIEF FACTS:-

The case of prosecution is that on 15.04.2021 at about 9.15 A.M in front of building No.13/1, 7th Cross, Rose Garden within the 2 C.C.No.54989/2021 jurisdictional limits of Ahsoknagar Police Station the accused has assaulted CW.1 with iron rod.

3. Based on the first information of CW.1, the police have registered the case, investigation was conducted and after completion of the investigation final report is filed against the accused.

4. The accused has entered appearance in response to the summons and has been enlarged on bail. The prosecution papers have been supplied to the accused. After hearing, the charge against the accused was framed to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. The prosecution has examined PW.1 and Ex.P1 and Ex.P2 are exhibited. The statement of the accused is dispensed with.

6. Heard arguments on both sides.

7. The following points arise for my consideration:-

1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on 15.04.2021 at about 9.15 A.M in front of building No.13/1, 7th Cross, Rose Garden within the jurisdictional limits of Ahsoknagar Police Station the accused has assaulted CW.1 with iron rod thereby committed an offence punishable u/s.324 of IPC?

2. What order?

8. My answer to the aforesaid points is as under:-

           Point No.1        -    In the Negative
           Point No.2        - As per final order for the following:-
                                         3                      C.C.No.54989/2021




                             REASONS

9. Point No.1:- In the instant case PW.1 is the complainant/injured in this case who has testified that the accused has not assaulted CW.1 with iron rod. PW.1 has stated that he has not given the complaint as per Ex.P1 in this regard. Although PW.1 subscribes to his signature appearing in the complaint at Ex.P1, he pleads ignorance to the contents of Ex.P1. PW.1 is treated hostile and cross-examined by the Ld.Sr.APP wherein nothing substantial is elicited in order to support the case of prosecution. PW.1 admits to have compromised with the accused.

10. This Court was of the opinion that PW.1 is the only material witnesses who has turned hostile and therefore the remaining witnesses were dropped by rejecting the prayer of Ld.Sr.APP.

11. On considering the evidence of PW.1 the complaint at Ex.P1, his evidence appears to be contradictory. The evidence of PW.1 is inconsistent with Ex.P1. PW.1 has admitted to have compromised with the accused. The prosecution is unable to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Since there is nothing incriminating against the accused, the only inference that could be drawn is that the accused are innocent of the offence leveled against him. Hence the accused deserves to be acquitted. Therefore I answer point No.1 in the NEGATIVE.

12. Point No.2: For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER Acting u/s.248(1) Cr.P.C. accused is hereby ACQUITTED for the offences punishable u/s.324 of Indian Penal Code.

The bail bond of the accused stands cancelled. (Dictated by me on computer, typed by the steno, same was corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 10th January 2022) (G.R.Kulkarni) XXIX ACMM, BENGALURU ANNEXURES LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION PW.1 Murugan LIST OF EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION Ex.P.1 Complaint Ex.P.1(a) Signature of PW.1 Ex.P.2 Statement of PW.1 LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS GOT MARKED :-

NIL (G.R.Kulkarni) XXIX ACMM, BENGALURU 5 C.C.No.54989/2021 10.01.2022 State by APP Accused For Judgment (Judgment passed separately in the Open Court) ORDER Acting u/s.248(1) Cr.P.C. accused is hereby ACQUITTED for the offences punishable u/s. 324 of Indian Penal Code.

The bail bond of the accused stands cancelled.

XXIX ACMM