Bangalore District Court
Visvanathgowda vs B.S.Parsad on 24 February, 2025
KABC030031182012
Presented on : 20.01.2012
Registered on : 20.01.2012
Decided on : 24.02.2025
Duration : 12y/01m/04days
IN THE COURT OF XLI ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, AT : BENGALURU
PRESIDED OVER BY TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA
B.A.,LL.B.,
XLI Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate
Bengaluru
Dated on this 24th day of February 2025
C.C.No.2996/2012
COMPLAINANT : The State by
Vidhana Soudha Police Station
-V/s-
ACCUSED : B.S.Prasad
S/o. M.Basavaraju, Aged 45 years,
R/at.No.1058, Gajendra Nilaya,
Sanjeevini Nagar, Sahakar Nagar,
Bengaluru.
Date of Commission of offence 01.10.2011
Date of report 01.10.2011
Date of arrest 02.10.2011
Name of the complainant S.C.Vishwanath Gowda
Date of commencement of 23.02.2016
recording Evidence
Date of closing evidence 22.08.2024
2 C.C.No.2996/2012
Offences complained of U/Sec. 341, 323, 353, 355, 504,
506 of IPC
Opinion of the Judge As per final orders
State Represented by Senior Asst.Public Prosecutor
Accused Represented by Sri.Srinath.S Advocate
JUDGMENT
[Delivered on 24.02.2025] The P.S.I of Vidhana Soudha police station has filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/Sec.341, 323, 353, 355, 504, 506 of IPC.
2. Brief facts of prosecution case is as follows:
On 01.01.2011 at 11a.m, to 11.45 a.m., the accused wrongfully restrained CW.2, the housing minister near room No.314, 3rd floor, Vidhana Soudha, when he was proceeding towards the meeting hall to attend Rajiv Gandhi Rural Development programme meeting, assaulted him with his chappal with an intention to dishonor him, obstructed him from discharging his official duties, beaten him with hands, caused hurt, abused him in a filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences. On the basis of computerized typed 3 C.C.No.2996/2012 information given by CW.1, the BJP activist, the Vidhana Soudha police have registered this case in Cr.No.51/2011.
3. On 02.10.2011, the accused was arrested and produced before the court. As per order dated: 07.10.2011, the accused was enlarged on bail.
4. After the investigation, the IO filed charge sheet against the accused. This Court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable U/Sec. 341, 323, 353, 355, 504, 506 of IPC. This Court complied with Sec.207 of Cr.P.C., and furnished charge sheet copy to the accused.
5. The Court heard both the parties. As there were no grounds to discharge the accused, the Court framed charges for the offences punishable U/Sec.341. 323, 353, 355, 504, 506 of IPC. The accused did not plead guilty. He claimed to be tried.
6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined 9 witnesses as PW.1 to 9 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 4 documents and MO.1. After the closure of the evidence of the prosecution, this court recorded the statement of the accused U/Sec.313 of 4 C.C.No.2996/2012 Cr.P.C., wherein he denied the incriminating evidence led against him. He did not choose to lead his defense evidence.
7. I have heard the arguments of Senior APP and Sri.SS Advocate.
8. On the basis of allegations made against the accused, the following points arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused wrongfully restrained CW.2, the housing minister on 01.01.2011 at 11a.m, to 11.45 a.m., near room No.314, 3rd floor, Vidhana Soudha, when he was proceeding towards the meeting hall to attend Rajiv Gandhi Rural Development programme meeting and thereby he has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.341 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place the accused assaulted CW.2 with his chappal without any provocation with an intention to dishonor him and thereby he has 5 C.C.No.2996/2012 committed the offence punishable U/Sec.355 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place the accused obstructed CW.2 from discharging his official duties and thereby he has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.353 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place the accused beaten CW.2 with hands, caused hurt and thereby they have committed the offence punishable U/Sec.323 of IPC?
5. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place the accused abused CW.2 in a filthy language and thereby he has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.504 of IPC?
6. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place the accused threatened CW.2 with dire 6 C.C.No.2996/2012 consequences and thereby he has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.506 of IPC?
7. What order?
9. My answers to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In Negative
Point No.2 : In Negative
Point No.3 : In Negative
Point No.4 : In Negative
Point No.5 : In Negative
Point No.6 : In Negative
Point No.7 : As per final orders for the following:
REASONS Point No.1 to 6: As all these points are interrelated, I take all the six points together for common discussion to avoid repetition.
10. The burden is casted on the prosecution to prove that, the accused wrongfully restrained CW.2, the housing minister on 01.01.2011 at 11a.m, to 11.45 a.m., near room No.314, 3rd floor, Vidhana Soudha, when he was proceeding towards the meeting hall to attend Rajiv Gandhi Rural Development programme meeting, assaulted him with his chappal without any provocation, with an intention to dishonor him, obstructed him 7 C.C.No.2996/2012 from discharging his official duties, beaten him with hands, caused hurt, abused him in a filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences.
11. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined the complainant/ CW.1 as PW.1, mahazer witnesses/CW.6 as PW.3, CW.14 as PW.5, eye witnesses/ CW.17 as PW.6, CW.18 as PW.7, CW.19 as PW.8, circumstantial witnesses/CW.10 as PW.2, CW.12 as PW.4 and the investigating officer/CW.20 as PW.9 and got marked the complaint as Ex.P.1, spot mahazar as Ex.P.2, seizure mahazer as Ex.P.3, FIR as Ex.P.4 and black coloured right leg chappal as MO.1.
12. CW.1/PW.1- Vishwanath Gowda, in his evidence has stated that, in the year 2011 the CW.2 was the housing minister. He was the personal assistant of CW.2. On 01.01.2011 at 11a.m., there was Rajiv Gandhi Rural Development programme meeting scheduled at Room No.113 of Vidhana Soudha. The CW.2 was proceeding to attend the meeting. Himself, CW.17 to 19 were going with CW.2. 8 C.C.No.2996/2012 In the corridor, the accused restrained CW.2, assaulted him with his slipper on his face, abused him in a filthy language by saying that, he will bring down his reputation. Then they caught hold of the accused and handed over him to the police. Thereafter, he went to the station and gave Ex.P.1 complaint. Thereafter, the police came to the spot and drawn Ex.P.2 mahazer in between 2.30p.m to 3.30p.m. Due to the act of the accused, the CW.2 was insulted and suffered obstruction in discharging his official duties. MO.1 is the chappal used by the accused for the commission of the offence. He has identified the accused.
13. CW.17/PW.6-M.E.Madhu, in his evidence has stated that, in the year 2011, he was the personal assistant to CW.2, the housing minister. On 01.10.2011 at 11 a.m to 11.30a.m., there was a meeting at Room No.313, 3rd floor of Vidhana Soudha. When the CW.2 was proceeding towards the meeting hall, public were addressing their grievances. At that time, the accused abused CW.2 and assaulted to his face with chappal. The nearby people 9 C.C.No.2996/2012 caught hold of the accused and handed over him to the police. Later, he learnt that the name of the accused is Prasad. Due to the act of the accused, the CW.2 face obstruction in discharging his official duties. He has identified the accused.
14. CW.18/PW.7- C.M.Rajappa, in his evidence has stated that, from the last 20 years he is working as assistant to CW.2, the then housing minister. On 01.10.2011 at 11 a.m., he was waiting to meet CW2 outside Room No.313, 3rd floor of Vidhana Soudha. At that time, he heard loud voice from Room No.314. He saw that, the accused assaulted to the face of CW.2 with chappal, when he was proceeding towards Room No.314 to attend the meeting. The nearby people and the gun man of CW.2 caught hold of the accused. Through police, he came to know that, Prasad is the name of the assailant. He has identified the accused. But, he could not identify the chappal, used for the commission of the offence.
15. CW.19/PW.8-H.Naveen, in his evidence has stated that, he was the gunman of CW.2 in the year 2011. On 01.10.2011 at 10 C.C.No.2996/2012 11.15a.m., when he was proceeding towards the meeting hall at Room No.314, 3rd floor of Vidhana Soudha along with CW.2, the accused was standing in the veranda. The accused raised his voice, assaulted the face of CW.2 with chappal by saying that, he is doing injustice and cheated him. Immediately, he along with others caught hold of the accused and handed over him to police. Later, he came to know that, his name is B.S.Prasad. He has identified the accused. MO.1 is the chappal, which was used by the accused to assault CW.2.
16. CW.10/PW.2-V.Chandrappa in his evidence has stated that, when he was deputed to security duty at Vidhana Soudha, on 01.10.2011 he along with CW.9 was deputed to duty at the office of Chief Secretary, 3rd floor, Vidhana Soudha. At 11.40a.m., there was a quarrel in front of Room No.313. He saw that, the people caught hold of the accused. Accordingly, he along with CW.9 produced the accused to the office of DCP. Later, he learnt that, 11 C.C.No.2996/2012 the accused assaulted CW.2 with chappal. He has identified the accused.
17. CW.12/PW.4-K.S.Krishnappa, in his evidence has stated that, when he was working as ASI at Vidhana Soudha police station, on 01.10.2011 from 8a.m to 8p.m., he was deputed to duty in Hoysala vehicle. At 11a.m., they received wireless message to go to Vidhana Soudha security office. At 12 p.m, they went to the security office of Vidhana Soudha. The officers handed over a person and asked them to produce him before the PI. Accordingly, at 1p.m., they produced a person by name Prasad before CW.20. They learnt that, the accused abused CW.2/housing minister V.Somanna in a filthy language and assaulted him with chappal. He has identified the accused.
18. CW.6/PW.3-Pradeep Kumar, in his evidence has stated that, Ex.P.2 mahazer bears his signature. In the matter of assault, on 07.10.2011 the police inspected the spot, drawn Ex.P.2 mahazer out side Room No.313, 3rd floor, Vidhana Soudha. The 12 C.C.No.2996/2012 complainant showed the spot to the police. At that time, the police seized MO.1 chappal.
19. CW.14/PW.5-Mahesh, in his evidence has stated that, Ex.P.3 bears his signature. He is not aware of the contents of the same. On 03.10.2011 he signed that document in a shop situated at Sanjeevini Nagar. The police did not seize any articles in his presence.
20. CW.20/PW.9-B.S.Lakshaman Kumar, in his evidence has stated that, when he was working as PI at Vidhana Soudha police station on 01.10.2011 at 12.30p.m., the CW.1 came to the station and gave Ex.P.1 complaint. On the basis of which, he registered Ex.P.4-FIR. On the same day at 1p.m., the CW.12 and 13 produced the accused before him. He enquired him, followed arrest procedure and recorded his voluntary statement. On the same day at 1.30p.m., he searched the body of the accused in the presence of CW.3 and 4 and found entrance ticket of Vidhana Soudha, driving licence, black coloured G5 phone having airtel 13 C.C.No.2996/2012 and aircel sim, small chit having the writing of Chennapattana and Bengaluru North West Committee. He seized those articles by drawing mahazer in the station in between 1.30p.m to 2p.m., He sent a requisition to ACP Cubbon Park to furnish call details of those two sim cards. On the same day, he gave requisition to the Vidhana Soudha security office to furnish CCTV footages. On the same day, he recorded the statements of CW.7 to 13. On 02.10.2011 he produced the accused before the Court and took him to police custody till 04.10.2011. On the same day, he collected the information from the register maintained at the entrance gate of Devaraj Urs gate. On 03.10.2011 he obtained search warrant to search the house of the accused. On the same day at 2.30p.m he visited the house of the accused, which is situated at Sahakari Nagar, Sanjeevini main road and seized 1 to 7 documents by drawing Ex.P.3 mahazer till 4p.m. On the same day, the CW.16 produced CCTV footages of the spot vide 4 CD's. On the same day, he recorded the statements of CW.17 to 19. On 04.10.2011, he recorded the statement of CW.2. On the same day, 14 C.C.No.2996/2012 he produced the accused before the Court and on 10.10.2011 he submitted a report to the Court regarding the search conducted in the house of the accused.
21. On the basis of Ex.P.1 typed information given by PW.1 on 01.10.2011, the Vidhana Soudha police have registered this case, investigated the matter and filed charge sheet against the accused. In Ex.P.1 the PW.1 alleged that, he is a BJP activist and assistant of V.Somanna/CW.2, the housing minister. On 01.10.2011 at 11 a.m., he along with CW.2, Rajappa C.M., body guard Naveen and personal assistant Madhu were proceeding towards Room No.313, 3rd floor of Vidhana Soudha to attend Rajiv Gandhi Rural Housing Corporation meeting. At that time, the accused/Prasad wrongfully restrained the minister, abused him in a filthy language, beaten him with hands, assaulted to his face with chappal, insulted, dishonored him and threatened him with dire consequences.
15 C.C.No.2996/2012
22. In order to ascertain the correctness of the allegations made in Ex.P.1, this Court had issued repeated summons, non bailable warrants and proclamations against CW.2 to 5, 7 to 9, 16 and 18. Inspite of it, the prosecution has not secured their presence. Hence, by noting the absence of the witnesses and age of the case, the Court dropped them from examination.
23. Though the CW.20 being the IO was examined as PW.9, he did not tender himself for further chief examination and cross examination. His further chief examination was deferred for want of documents, said to be seized by drawing mahazers. Inspite of ordering for deduction of Rs.1000/- from his salary towards bailable warrant, issuance of repeated non bailable warrants and proclamations, he did not tender himself for further chief examination and cross examination. Hence, he was dropped from further examination.
24. In the present case, the CW.2 being the victim and affected person did not appear before the Court to substantiate the 16 C.C.No.2996/2012 contents of Ex.P.1. Though the PW.1 claims to be the BJP activist and personal assistant of CW.2 at the time of alleged incident, the PW.9 being the IO did not collect any documents to show the status or designation of PW.1.Because, in the present case, the PW.6 also claims to be the Personal Assistant of CW.2 at the time of alleged incident. Surprisingly, the PW.7 also stated that, he is working as assistant to CW.2, the then housing minister from the last 20 years. In the absence of documents, the Court cannot believe that, PW.1, PW.6 and PW.7 were working as personal assistants to CW.2 as on the date of alleged incident.
25. As contended by the prosecution in Ex.P.1, if any unpleasant incident was occurred at Vidhana Soudha, the Personal secretary appointed by the Government or under secretary ought to have lodged complaint. But, none of them lodged any such complaint. The PW.9 being the IO did not enquire them to ascertain the correctness of the allegations made 17 C.C.No.2996/2012 in Ex.P.1. The CW.2 did not visit the doctor for examination or treatment as he was allegedly assaulted with the chappal.
26. According to the prosecution, the PW.9 has drawn Ex.P.2 mahazer and seized MO.1 black coloured chappal from the spot, which was showed by PW.1. But, the PW.9 being the IO did not speak about visiting the spot of incident, drawing of Ex.P.2 mahazer and seizing of MO.1 chappal. According to the prosecution, the alleged incident occurred on 01.10.2011 at 11a.m., the accused was taken to the station immediately and Ex.P.2 spot mahazer was drawn in between 2.30p.m. to 3.30p.m. According to PW.3, the police have drawn Ex.P.2 mahazer on 07.10.2011. But, Ex.P.2 bears the date of 01.10.2011. Hence, it is not believable that, MO.1 chappal was available at the same spot, when the IO visited the spot for inspection and drawing of mahazer, though the accused was allegedly arrested much prior to drawing of mahazer.
18 C.C.No.2996/2012
27. In Ex.P.2, the IO did not mention, which leg's chappal was seized and to which brand it belonged. All the witnesses who are examined before the Court are either the associates of CW.2 or police officials. Though the PW.1 in his chief examination has stated that, the accused assaulted CW.2 with chappal, beaten him with hands, abused him in filthy language, threatened him and obstructed him from discharging his duties, he himself in his cross examination has admits that, he has seen the accused in the Court and prior to it, he has not seen him elsewhere.
28. According to PW.1, he has signed Ex.P.2 spot mahazer in the chambers of police inspector. The PW.2 being a signatory to Ex.P.2 mahazer, in his cross examination has stated that, he has signed Ex.P.2 in the chambers of police inspector. The version of PW.1 and 2 makes the Court to believe that, Ex.P.2 mahazer was not drawn at the spot of alleged incident.
29. The PW.9 did not produce any documents before the Court to show that, PW.2 and PW.8 discharged their duties at Vidhana 19 C.C.No.2996/2012 Soudha, near the chambers of CW.2 as on the date of alleged incident. The PW.9 being the IO did not tender himself for further chief examination to produce CCTV footages, which were collected by him during the course of investigation.
30. According to PW.4, he visited the security office of Vidhana Soudha, after receiving wireless message. He is a hearsay witness. The IO did not produce any documents from Vidhana Soudha police station to show that, PW.4 and CW.13 were deputed to duty in Hoysala vehicle as on the date of alleged incident and they visited Vidhana Soudha security office to take the accused to produce him before DCP.
31. The PW.5 is a signatory to Ex.P.3 seizure mahazer. Though the prosecution contends that, the PW.9 seized visiting cards, letter dated: 05.02.2009 written on letter head, letter dated:
08.10.2010 written on letter head, letter for the issuance of identity cards to senior citizens, election expenditure information dated:
21.06.2011 and letter addressed to the state president of BJP dated: 20 C.C.No.2996/2012 30.05.2011 by drawing Ex.P.3 mahazer from the house of accused, those documents are not produced before the Court. The PW.5 being one of the pancha witnesses to Ex.P.3 denied that, the police have seized documents in his presence from the house of the accused by drawing mahazer.
32. The PW.9 in his chief examination has stated that, on 01.10.2011 at 1.30p.m., he searched the body of the accused in the presence of CW.3 and 4 and found entrance ticket of Vidhana Soudha, driving licence, black coloured G5 phone having airtel and aircel sim and small chit having the writing of Chennapattana and Bengaluru North West Committee by drawing mahazer, those documents are not produced before the Court. No independent witnesses appeared before the Court to say that, the police checked the body of the accused in their presence and seized many documents from him.
33. According to PW.6, the gunmans of CW.2 were at the distance of 4-5 feet, when the alleged incident took place. The 21 C.C.No.2996/2012 PW.8 contends that, he was the gun man of CW.2 as on the date of incident and he handed over the accused to the police. The PW.9 being the IO contends that, the CW.12 and 13 produced the accused before him. The PW.8 did not tender himself for cross examination. Hence, much importance cannot be given to his evidence.
34. Hence, in the absence of CCTV footages and the oral evidence of independent witnesses, the Court cannot believe the oral evidence of PW.1 to 9. Because, PW.1, 6 and 7 are the associates of CW.2, PW.2, 4, 8 and 9 police officials and PW.3 is the assistant of Chief Minister's office. Moreover, in the present case, the victim/CW.2 did not appear before the Court to explain the unpleasant incident, if any occurred on 01.10.2011 near the meeting hall of Room No.314, 3rd floor of Vidhana Soudha.
35. The IO did not produce the copy of Vidhana Soudha entry register dated: 01.10.2011, so as to say that, the accused entered Vidhana Soudha. The IO did not produce CC TV footages to substantiate the contents of Ex.P.1. In such circumstances 22 C.C.No.2996/2012 , the evidence led by PW.1 to 9 is not helpful to the case of the prosecution. From their evidence, the charges leveled against the accused are not proved. There is no convincing and believable evidence on record to connect the accused with the alleged crime. Thus, the prosecution has failed to prove that, the accused wrongfully restrained CW.2, the housing minister on 01.01.2011 at 11a.m, to 11.45 a.m., near room No.314, 3rd floor, Vidhana Soudha, when he was proceeding towards the meeting hall to attend Rajiv Gandhi Rural Development programme meeting, assaulted him with his chappal without any provocation with an intention to dishonor him, obstructed him from discharging his official duties, beaten him with hands, caused hurt, abused him in a filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences. Accordingly, I answer point No.1 to 6 in Negative. Point No.7: For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass the following:
23 C.C.No.2996/2012
ORDER By exercising the powers conferred U/Sec.248[1] of Cr.P.C., the accused is acquitted from the charges of Sec.341, 323, 353, 355, 504, 506 of IPC.
The bail bonds executed by the accused stands cancelled. The bonds executed by the accused U/Sec.437[A] of Cr.P.C., will be in force for a period of 6 months.
The property seized under PF No.46/2011/2011[PR No.3/2018] i.e., MO.1- black colored chappal being worthless is ordered to be destroyed after the appeal period.
The properties seized under PF
No.45/2011 vide item No.1 and 2,
PF.No.47/2011 vide item No.3 are ordered to be confiscated to the Government and other documents seized under PF No.45/2011, 47/2011 and PF No.48/2011 are ordered to be destroyed after the appeal period.
TATTANDA Digitally signed by TATTANDA
DAMAYANTI SOMAIAH
DAMAYANTI Date: 2025.02.24 17:34:42
SOMAIAH +0530
24.02.2025 [TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA]
XLI A.C.J.M., BENGALURU
24 C.C.No.2996/2012
ANNEXURE
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PROSECUTION:
PW.1 : Vishwanatha Gowda PW.2 : V.Chandrappa PW.3 : Pradeep Kumar PW.4 : K.S.Krishnappa PW.5 : Mahesh PW.6 : M.E.Madhu PW.7 : C.M.Rajappa PW.8 : H.Naveen PW.9 : B.S.Lakshman Kumar
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 : First Information/Complaint Ex.P.1[a] : Signature of PW.1 Ex.P.1[b] : Signature of PW.9 Ex.P.2 : Spot mahazar Ex.P.2[a] : Signature of PW.1 Ex.P.2[b] : Signature of PW.3 Ex.P.3 : Seizure mahazer Ex.P.3[a] : Signature of PW.5 Ex.P.3[b] : Signature of PW.9 Ex.P.4 : FIR Ex.P.4[a] : Signature of PW.9 25 C.C.No.2996/2012 LIST OF M.O's MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION :
MO.1 : Black coloured chappal LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR ACCUSED : NIL LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR ACCUSED : NIL
....................................................................................
Dictated on : 22.02.2025
Transcribed on : 22.02.2025
checked on : 24.02.2025
Signed on : 24.02.2025
[TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA]
XLI A.C.J.M., BENGALURU
Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app "eCourts Services" from Android or iOS