Bangalore District Court
Bengaluru City vs No.1 And 2 Are on 31 October, 2022
1 C.C.No.25491/2021
KABC030696452021
Presented on : 27-09-2021
Registered on : 27-09-2021
Decided on : 31-10-2022
Duration : 1 years, 1 months, 4 days
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY
Dated this 31st day of October 2022
PRESENT : SRI.VEDAMOORTHY B.S. B.A.(L), LL.B.
II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City
JUDGMENT UNDER SECTION 355 OF Cr.P.C.
1.Sl. No. of the case C.C.No.25491/2021 Date of commission of the
2. 11.06.2017 offence (As per F.I.R.) Konanakunte Police Station,
3. Name of the complainant Bengaluru City.
4. Name of the accused 1. Prasanna Kumar D.R @ Prasanna, S/o Rangaswamy, Aged about 28 years, R/at No.34, Pillaganahalli, Near Muniyamma Temple, Pillaganahalli Weavers Colony, B.G.Road, Bengaluru City.
2 C.C.No.25491/2021
2. Santhosh Kumar @ Santhosh @ Appi, S/o Muniraju, Aged about 32 years, R/at No.17, Kembattalli, Gottigere, Bengaluru City.
The offences complained Sections 379, 420 and 511 of
5.
of the Indian Penal Code. 6. Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty Accused No.1 and 2 are 7. Final order acquitted 8. Date of order 31.10.2022
The Police Sub-Inspector of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru has filed Police Report against the above named accused persons alleging that they have committed the offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 21 and 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.
2. The Prosecution case in brief is that the accused persons by digging the lands, collecting the water in the ponds on Government land bearing Sy.No.1 of Pillaganahalli Village and Sy.No.55 of Kembattalli Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk within the territorial jurisdiction of 3 C.C.No.25491/2021 Konanakunte Police Station and illegally doing manufacturing of filter sand. On 11.06.2017 at 6.30 a.m., CW1 as per the directions of his superior officer raided the said land and seized the tractor which was using for manufacturing of filter same. It came to know during investigation that the accused persons by preparing filter sand illegally were transporting it by committing theft of the sand; they were selling the said filter sand to the general public by cheating the tax to the Government and as pure sand to the general public. Thereby, the accused persons have committed the offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 21 and 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.
3. Based on the First Information of CW1, the crime was registered in Crime No.309/2017 at Konanakunte Police Station. On completion of the investigation, the Police Sub- Inspector of Konanakunte Police Station, Bengaluru City filed Police Report against the accused persons alleging that they 4 C.C.No.25491/2021 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 21 and 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. After taking cognizance of the said offences, the process was issued to the accused persons. They have appeared before this Court and enlarged on bail. The copies of the Police Report and other prosecution papers are furnished to the accused persons under section 207 of Cr.P.C. Vide order dated 26.03.2019, this case was transferred to the Hon'ble City Civil and Sessions Court, Bengaluru. The same is sent back to this Court as per the orders passed in Special C.C.No.560/2017. Thereafter, the cognizance was taken for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code. After hearing, since there were grounds for presuming that the accused persons have committed offences triable by this court, charges for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code have been framed and read over to them in Kannada language. They have pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried. 5 C.C.No.25491/2021
4. To prove the charges framed against the accused persons, the prosecution has produced the oral evidences of PW1 and PW2 and the documentary evidences in Ex.P1 to Ex.P11. After completion of the prosecution evidences, for the purpose of enabling the accused persons personally to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidences of the prosecution against them, examined the accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. They have submitted that they have no defense evidence. Heard the arguments of learned Senior Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused persons. Perused the materials available on record.
5. The points for determination are;
1. Whether prosecution has proved the offences charged against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code beyond reasonable doubt?
2. What order or sentence?
6 C.C.No.25491/2021
6. My answers to the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 : In the Negative,
Point No.2 : As per final order for the following;
REASONS
7. POINT No.1 :- In order to prove the charges leveled against the accused persons, out of 6 witnesses cited in the Police Report by the Investigation Officer, the prosecution has produced the oral evidences of only two witnesses before this Court as PW1 and PW2. Among them, PW1 Dilip Kumar V.G, is the First Informant and PW2 Venkateshaiah is the Investigation Officer of this case. The Prosecution has also produced the documentary evidences Ex.P1 to Ex.P11. Among them, Ex.P1 is the First Information, Ex.P2 is the Mahazar, Ex.P3 to Ex.P5 are the photographs of the tractor, Ex.P6 is the First Information Report, Ex.P7 is the Requisition of the Investigation Officer, Ex.P8 is the Indemnity Bond, Ex.P9 is the Bail Bond, Ex.P10 is Mahazar and Ex.P11 is Report.
7 C.C.No.25491/2021
8. The accused persons during their examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C have denied the entire Prosecution evidences which are incriminating against them. They have not produced any oral and documentary evidences.
9. Based on the First Information given by PW1 as per Ex.P1, the crime has been registered as per Ex.P6 - the First Information Report. The case of the prosecution and the allegations made in Ex.P1 in brief are that PW1 is the Officer who visited Kembathanahalli and Pillaganahalli along with CW2 on 11.06.2017 at 6.30 a.m.; found the manufacturing of filter sand by crating ponds and by using tractor; seized the tractor by conducting mahazar as per Ex.P2 and on enquiry with the general public, they stated that the accused persons are doing it. This made PW1 to seize tractor; to give First Information to PW2 and to book the accused persons by registering the Crime. In Ex.P1, there are photographs appearing the signs of manufacturing filter sands. PW1 has deposed the said facts in his examination-in-chief. He has identified the tractor seized by him through Ex.P3 to Ex.P5. 8 C.C.No.25491/2021
10. PW2 has deposed in his examination-in-chief that on 06.02.2017 at 12.40 p.m., he received the First Information given by PW1 as per Ex.P1; registered the crime; forwarded the First Information Report as per Ex.P6; received the Mahazar and tractor produced by PW1; on 09.02.2017, he filed requisition to hand over the tractor to the interim custody of its owner as per Ex.P7; after the permission of the Court, he handed over the interim custody of the tractor to its owner by obtaining Indemnity Bonds as per Ex.P8 and Ex.P9 by conducting mahazar as per Ex.P10; deputed CW5 to secure the accused persons; on 22.07.2018, CW5 produced the accused persons before him along with Report as per Ex.P11; he released them by obtaining their bail bonds and on completion of the investigation, he filed Police Report against the accused persons.
11. The above evidences of the prosecution are testified through cross-examination on behalf of the accused persons. On reading the oral evidences of PW1 and PW2 both examination-in-chief and cross-examination as well as the 9 C.C.No.25491/2021 documentary evidences Ex.P1 to Ex.P11 collectively, absolutely, there are lack of evidences to hold that the accused persons by digging the lands, collecting the water in the ponds on Government land bearing Sy.No.1 of Pillaganahalli Village and Sy.No.55 of Kembattalli Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk were illegally doing manufacturing of filter sand, they were illegally transporting it by committing theft, they were selling the said filter sand to the general public by cheating the tax to the Government and as pure sand to the general public.
12. Firstly, there are no evidences from the prosecution to prove that the lands bearing Sy.No.1 of Pillaganahalli Village and Sy.No.55 of Kembattalli Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk are the Government lands. Secondly, PW1 has admitted in his cross-examination that when he went to the place of the alleged incident, there were no filter sands and he has unable to say that how much filter sands were extracted and how much was cheated. PW1 has also deposed in his examination-in-chief that the local people told 10 C.C.No.25491/2021 the names of the accused persons and he does not know their their names. It appears from the oral evidences of PW1 that when he visited the place of alleged incident, the accused persons were not present at the place of incident. Thirdly, PW1 has admitted in his cross-examination that he has not enquired about the owner of the tractor. It appears from the contents of Ex.P8 to Ex.P10 that one Rmakrishna is the owner of the tractor seized by PW1. It is not the case of the prosecution that the said Ramakrishna was involved in commission of the alleged offences. PW2 has admitted in his cross-examination that the owner of the tractor is not made as an accused. Moreover, as aforesaid, PW1 has admitted in his cross-examination that when he went to the place of the alleged incident, there were no filter sands. Such being the circumstances, it appears that the name of the accused persons are introduced in this case only based on the information given by unknown persons who stated before PW1.
11 C.C.No.25491/2021
13. Fourthly, PW2 has deposed in his cross-examination that he has not enquired at the place of incident about the alleged incident. PW2 has admitted in his cross-examination that PW1 has not produced the filter sand and he has not produced any documents about the value of cheating. It is also not the case of the prosecution that to whom, the accused persons have cheated. If the evidences produced by the prosecution are assessed in its totality, except the hearsay evidence of PW1, there are no evidences to hold that the accused persons by digging the lands, collecting the water in the ponds on Government land bearing Sy.No.1 of Pillaganahalli Village and Sy.No.55 of Kembattalli Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk were illegally doing manufacturing of filter sand, they were illegally transporting it by committing theft, they were selling the said filter sand to the general public by cheating the tax to the Government and as pure sand to the general public. Considering the above circumstances, I am holding that the prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 511 of the Indian 12 C.C.No.25491/2021 Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, I answer Point No.1 in the Negative.
14. POINT No.2 :- For the reasons stated in Point No.1, the prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, the accused persons are not found guilty for the aforesaid offences charged against them. In the result, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDERS Under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C, the accused persons are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code.
Their bail bonds and the surety bonds executed by their sureties will be in force till completion of appeal period. Thereafter, they shall be stands canceled. 13 C.C.No.25491/2021
Interim Order on tractor seized in this case made absolute. This order shall come into force after appeal period.
(Typed by the Stenographer in the Court computer on my direct dictation, printout taken, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on 31.10.2022) (VEDAMOORTHY B.S.) II Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
ANNEXURE Witnesses Examined on behalf of Prosecution :-
PW1 : Dilip Kumar,
PW2 : Venkateshaiah.
Documents marked on behalf of Prosecution :-
Ex.P1 : First Information,
Ex.P1(a) & (b) : Signatures,
Ex.P2 : Mahazar,
Ex.P2(a) to (c) : Signatures,
Ex.P3 to 5 : Photographs,
Ex.P6 : First Information Report,
Ex.P6(a) : Signature,
Ex.P7 : Requisition,
Ex.P7(a) : Signature,
14 C.C.No.25491/2021
Ex.P8 : Indemnity Bond,
Ex.P8(a) : Signature,
Ex.P9 : Indemnity Bond,
Ex.P9(a) : Signature,
Ex.P10 : Mahazar,
Ex.P10(a) : Signature,
Ex.P11 : Report,
Ex.P11(a) : Signature.
Material objects marked on behalf of Prosecution :-
NIL Witnesses Examined on behalf of the accused :-
NIL Documents marked on behalf of the accused :-
NIL (VEDAMOORTHY B.S.) II Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.15 C.C.No.25491/2021
31.10.2022 Judgment pronounced in open Court vide separate order.
ORDERS Under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C, the accused persons are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 420 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code.
Their bail bonds and the surety bonds executed by their sureties will be in force till completion of appeal period. Thereafter, they shall be stands canceled. 16 C.C.No.25491/2021 Interim Order on tractor seized in this case made absolute. This order shall come into force after appeal period.
(VEDAMOORTHY B.S.) II Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.