Bangalore District Court
State By Ashoknagar Police vs James E David on 21 September, 2021
IN THE COURT OF THE XXIX ADDL.C.M.M
MAYOHALL UNIT, BENGALURU
Dated: The 21st Day of September 2021
PRESENT: Sri. G.R.KULKARNI,
B.A.(LAW)., LL.B.,
XXIX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
C.C.No. 60348/2018
COMPLAINANT :- State by Ashoknagar Police
(By Sr.APP)
ACCUSED 1. James E David
S/o. John Nathanal Iliyaz.
Aged 43 years,
R/at.No.71, 1st Floor,
M.M.Road, Frezor Town, Bengaluru.
2. Nayaz Ahmed Sharrief
S/o. Mohammed Buranuddin
Aged 50 years
R/at.Park View Apartment,
1st Floor, Flat No.2/3, Richards Town,
Bengaluru.
3. Margratte W/o. Anthoni Raj
Aged 50 years,
R/at.Niraz Heisiyan Villa Benjara
layout, Horamavu, Bengaluru.
(By Sri.Karigowda., Advocate)
DATE OF COMMENCEMENT ----
OF EVIDENCE
DATE OF JUDGMENT 21.09.2021
2 C.C.No.60348/2018
JUDGMENT
This is a final report filed by the PI of Ashoknagar Police Station against the accused No.1 to 3 for the offences punishable u/s. 504, 509 and 506 of Indian Penal Code.
2. BRIEF FACTS:-
The case of prosecution is that on 17.04.2018 at about 11.00 A.M at Residency Road, Mayohall Court Complex, 1 st Floor, 11th ACMM Court within the jurisdictional limits of Ashoknagar Police Station, the accused No.1 to 3 in furtherance of common intention have intentionally insulted CW.1, insulted her modesty and criminally intimidated her.
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 No.1 to 3.
4. The accused No.1 to 3 have entered appearance in response to the summons and have been enlarged on bail. The prosecution papers have been supplied to the accused No.1 to 3. The substance of accusation is read over the accused No.1 to 3 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. In-spite of giving sufficient opportunities the prosecution has not secured any of its witnesses. Hence prayer of the Ld.Sr.APP to re-summons CW.1 to CW.6 was rejected and these witnesses were dropped. There is no incriminating evidence against the 3 C.C.No.60348/2018 accused and therefore the statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., 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 17.04.2018 at about 11.00 A.M at Residency Road, Mayohall Court Complex, 1st Floor, 11th ACMM Court within the jurisdictional limits of Ashoknagar Police Station, the accused No.1 to 3 in furtherance of common intention have intentionally insulted CW.1 causing breach of peace thereby committed an offence punishable u/s.504 r/w. Sec.34 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the above mentioned date, time and place the accused No.1 to 3 in furtherance of common intention have insulted the modesty of CW.1 thereby committed an offence punishable u/s.509 r/w.
Sec.34 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that on the above mentioned date, time and place the accused No.1 to 3 in furtherance of common intention criminally intimidated CW.1 thereby committed an offence punishable U/s.506 r/w. Sec.34 of IPC?
4. What order?
8. My answer to the aforesaid points is as under:-
Point No.1 to 3 - In the Negative
Point No.4 - As per final order
for the following:-
4 C.C.No.60348/2018
REASONS
9. Point No.1 to 3 :- As the facts pertaining to these points are related to each other, all these points are taken together for common discussion for brevity.
10. In the instant case the prosecution inspite of giving sufficient opportunities has not secured CW.1 to CW.6. Hence prayer of the Ld.Sr.APP to re-summons these witnesses is rejected and CW.1 to CW.6 have been dropped by exhausting all effective measures.
11. I am of the view that not securing any of its witnesses by the prosecution inspite of taking effective measures would prove fatal to the case of the prosecution in establishing guilt of the accused. Therefore I hold that the prosecution is unable to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and the charges leveled against the accused No.1 to 3 is not proved. Hence the accused No.1 to 3 deserve to be acquitted. Therefore I answer point No.1 to 3 in the NEGATIVE.
12. Point No.4 : For the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting U/s.255(1) Cr.P.C. accused No.1 to 3 is hereby ACQUITTED for the offence punishable u/s. 504, 506 and 509 r/w. Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code.5 C.C.No.60348/2018
The bail bond of the accused No.1 to 3 stands cancelled. The cash security offered by accused No.1 to 3 for their release on bail shall be refunded on proper identification.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on the computer, same is corrected and then pronounced in open Court on this the 21st day of September 2021) (G.R.Kulkarni) XXIX ACMM, BENGALURU 6 C.C.No.60348/2018 [ ANNEXURES LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION NIL LIST OF EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION NIL LIST OF MATERIAL OBJECTS GOT MARKED :-
NIL (G.R.Kulkarni) XXIX ACMM, BENGALURU 7 C.C.No.60348/2018 21.09.2021 State by APP Accused For Judgment (Judgment passed separately in the Open Court) ORDER Acting U/s.255(1) Cr.P.C. accused No.1 to 3 is hereby ACQUITTED for the offence punishable u/s. 504, 506 and 509 r/w. Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code.
The bail bond of the accused No.1 to 3 stands cancelled. The cash security offered by accused No.1 to 3 for their release on bail shall be refunded on proper identification.
XXIX ACMM