Bangalore District Court
Judge Shri Chandrashekar (Scch-13) Has ... vs Has Not Adduced Any Defence Evidence On ... on 24 May, 2018
IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL.CMM: BENGALURU
Dated this the 24th day May 2018.
Present: Shri V.Jagadeesh, B.Sc., LL.M.
I Addl. C.M.M BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT U/s.355 Cr.P.C.,
Case No. : C.C.No.9993/2011
Date of Offence : During the year 2011
Name of complainant : Shri Chandrashekar,
II Addl. Judge, (SCCH-13),
Court of Small Causes,
Bengaluru.
Name of accused : Smt.Kanakamma w/o J.Gurumurthy,
aged 35 years, r/o No.Bholare village
and Post, Uttarahalli Hobli,
Bengaluru South taluk,
Bengaluru 560 061.
Offence complained off: U/s. 181, 182, 193, 209, 465, 466,
468 and 471 of IPC.
Plea of accused : Pleaded guilty
Final Order : As per final order
Date of Order : 24-5-2018.
2 C.C.No.9993/2011
JUDGMENT
Shri Chandrashekar, II Additional Judge, (SCCH-13), Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru has filed a private complaint against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 181, 182, 193, 209, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code.
2. It is the case of the complainant that, on 28-9-2010 before the II Additional Judge, Small Causes Court, Bengaluru the accused has filed an application and falsely deposing on oath stating that she is the only daughter of deceased Smt.Meenakshamma who died on 23-3-2010 and not on 23-8-2010 and also making false claim on the compensation deposited by Insurance Company and also given false evidence in this regard and also made false declaration that Smt.Meenakshamma died on 23-3-2010 and not on 23-8-2010 and also dishonestly and fraudulently fabricated the death certificate of Smt.Meenakshamma and also forged the records of the court and fraudulently used the death certificate of Smt.Meenalskhamma as genuine. Under such circumstances, the 3 C.C.No.9993/2011 complainant judge Shri Chandrashekar (SCCH-13) has filed a complaint before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru and same is assigned to this court and same is registered as C.C.No.9993/2011 for the alleged offences against the accused.
3. After appearance of the accused, necessary documents as relied by the complaint, are furnished to the accused as provided under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. Charge has been framed and same is read over and explained to the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried. Therefore, the case was posted for prosecution evidence.
4. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the complainant Shri Chandrashekar, II Additional Judge, (SCCH-13) is examined as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P12.
5. After completion of complainant evidence, the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. The accused has not adduced any defence evidence on her behalf. Therefore, there is no defence evidence on behalf of the accused. 4 C.C.No.9993/2011
6. Heard the arguments. The points that would arise for my consideration are as under:
1. Whether the complainant proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused has committed the offences punishable under Sections 181, 182, 193, 209, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code?
2. What Order ?
7. My answer to the above points are as under:
Point No.1: Affirmative.
Point No.2: As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
8. Point No.1:- The contention of the prosecution is that on 28-9-2010 before the II Additional Judge, Small Causes Court, Bengaluru the accused has filed an application and falsely deposing on oath stating that she is the only daughter of deceased Smt.Meenakshamma who died on 23-3-2010 and not on 23-8-2010 and also making false claim on the compensation deposited by Insurance Company and also given false evidence in this regard and also made false declaration that 5 C.C.No.9993/2011 Smt.Meenakshamma died on 23-3-2010 and not on 23-8-2010 and also dishonestly and fraudulently fabricated the death certificate of Smt.Meenakshamma and also forged the records of the court and fraudulently used the death certificate of Smt.Meenalskhamma as genuine and thereby the accused has committed the offences punishable under Sections 181, 182, 193, 209, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code.
9. In order to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 181, 182, 193, 209, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code, the complainant/C.W.1, Judge, Court of Small Causes is examined as P.W.1. P.W.1 in the course of chief-examination has reiterated the allegations made against the accused for the alleged offences. It is specific case of the complainant that a lady by name Smt.Meenakshamma who was injured in a road traffic accident, has filed a claim petition before SCCH-13, Bengaluru and the said case was registered as M.V.C.5056/2009. It is further deposed by P.W.1 that on 16-8-2010, the counsel appearing for the petitioner in the said 6 C.C.No.9993/2011 case had filed a memo requesting the court to refer the matter for settlement before the Lok Adalath, which was to be held on 17-8-2010. Accordingly, the entire case file was sent to Lok Adalath for settlement on 17-8-2010. It is further deposed by P.W.1 that after one month, the Small Causes Court Hall No.13 Judge i.e., P.W.1 has received the case file and noticed that the matter was settled on the basis of joint memo filed before the Lok Adalath. Thereafter, the accused herein claiming to be the daughter of petitioner Smt.Meenakshamma, has filed L.R. application along with death certificate stating that Smt.Meenakshamma died on 23-8-2010 and prayed to pay the compensation amount deposited by Insurance Company as per the terms of the compromise award. However, the Xerox copy of the death certificate of Smt.Menakshamma was filed along with L.R. application. When the court has insisted the accused person to produce death certificate, the same was filed by her on the subsequent date. So far as the above facts are concerned, absolutely there is no dispute. The evidence adduced by P.W.1 7 C.C.No.9993/2011 in further chgief-examination is very important to initiate criminal proceedings against the accused. In the course of further chief-examination in page No.2, P.W.1 has deposed to the following effect:
On the perusal of the said death I found that the date of death of Smt.Meenakshamma as well as date of issuance of death certificate and also a registration number were found to be altered.
The evidence of P.W.1 as above clearly shows that there was a doubt with regard to the genuinity of death certificate of Smt.Menakshmamma with regard to the date of death. Therefore, P.W.1 has directed the Revenue Inspector of Utharahalli to file a report about the death of exact date of Smt.Meenakshamma. Immediately thereafter, the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company has filed a memo requesting the court not to release the amount of compensation deposited in the court in favour of the applicant i.e., accused. It 8 C.C.No.9993/2011 is further deposed by P.W.1 that it was stated in the memo that a fraud was played by the accused before the court and manipulating the death certificate. Accordingly, the concerned Village Accountant appeared before the court, as directed by the court and produced self attested extract of death register of Smt.Meenakshamma before the court and undertook to produce the attested copy of register of birth and death. After one week the certified copy of said register was filed before the court.
10. In the further chief-examination itself P.W.1 has deposed in page No.2 and 3 to the following effect:
After perusing all the documents produced by the concerned officials and also by the applicant by name Kanakamma it was found that Smt.Meenakshamma died on 23-3-2010. However, the applicant had filed false affidavit forged death certificate stating that her mother Meenakshamma died on 23-08-2010.9 C.C.No.9993/2011
The evidence of P.W.1 as above clearly shows that after perusal of documents produced by the concerned officials it was found by the court that Smt.Menakshamma was died on 23-3-2010, but death certificate produced by the accused shown as Smt.Meenakshamma died on 23-8-2010. Therefore, after coming to know the said manipulation, false declaration and false evidence, P.W.1 has filed the present complaint for the alleged offences as provided under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. This is sum and substance of evidence of P.W.1 with regard to the allegations made against the accused. And in the chief-examination P.W.1 has got marked the complaint, petition in MVC 5056/2009, award passed by Lok Adalath, LR application filed by the accused, death certificate produced by the accused, register of birth and death extract, memo filed by the Advocate for Insurance Company, death report of Smt.Meenakshamma, report submitted by Village Accountant, death report and order sheet in MVC No.5056/2009 are all marked as Exs.P1 to P12.10 C.C.No.9993/2011
11. It is very important point to be noted at this stage itself that to prove the guilt of the accused, whether there is sufficient material on record to prove that the accused has given false evidence and statement before the court and furnished false information with regard to the date of death of Smt.Meenakshamma and whether the accused has produced false and frivolous and created documents and whether she has made a false claim before the curt are all to be decided by appreciating the documentary evidence produced by the complainant in the present case. Therefore, it is clear that the documentary evidence produced before the court plays a very important role to prove the guilt of the accused for the alleged offences.
12. So far as filing of claim petition, referring the same to the Lok Adalath for settlement on the basis of memo filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the said case, settlement before the Lok Adalath, compromise award passed in the Lok Adalath and compensation deposited by the Insurance Company 11 C.C.No.9993/2011 before the court are not at all in dispute. Therefore, I need not discuss much with regard to the same. The only facts to be considered by this court are whether the accused has committed any such offences as alleged in the complaint.
13. The learned counsel appearing for the accused has cross-examined P.W.1 in detail in order to disprove the case of the complainant and to test the veracity of P.W.1. In the course of cross-examination, P.W.1 has categorically deposed that after verifying all the documents produced before the court by the accused, he has directed to lodge complaint against her. It is also admitted by P.W.1 that MVC 5056/2009 was pending before the court for more than 1½ year. However, by looking into the order sheet in MVC, P.W.1 has deposed that trial was commenced in the MVC case in which P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined which was recorded by P.W.1 himself. It is also admitted by P.W.1 that the trial was completed before referring the matter for settlement before the Lok ADalath. All these facts are not relevant to disprove the allegations made against the 12 C.C.No.9993/2011 accused. The present complaint filed against the accused is on the ground that she has adduced false evidence, given false information and furnished false statement, manipulated the death certificate and made false claim in the MVC case on the ground that she is the only daughter of deceased petitioner.
14. The learned counsel appearing for the accused has posed a question in the cross-examination of P.W.1 to which he has deposed to the following effect in page No.5.
Q:- The compromise petition which was filed before the Lok Adalath was signed by the petitioner, respondent and their counsel?
Ans:- By the time the compromise petition was filed before the Lok Adalath the petitioner Menakshmamma was died.
The answer given by P.W.1 to the question posed by the learned counsel for accused clearly shows that by the time a compromise petition was filed before the Lok Adalath, the petitioner Meenakshamma was not alive. In order to establish this fact, the death certificate produced before the court by the 13 C.C.No.9993/2011 accused is very important. In fact, the death certificate filed in the present case is marked as Ex.P6. The careful perusal of Ex.P6 clearly shows that the registration number, date of registration and date of issue were all manipulated by forging. IN otherwords, the perusal of Ex.P6 clearly shows that the date of death is corrected as 23-8-2010 instead of 23-3-2010. Similarly, the registration number is corrected as 8-10-2010 in the place of 3-10-2010. Similarly, the date of registration is corrected as 29- 8-2010 instead of 29-3-2010. Similarly, the date of issue is shown as 12-9-2010 in the place of 12-4-2010. Therefore, it is clear that Ex.P6, which is certified copy of death certificate produced before Small Causes Court is manipulated and created document.
15. To corroborate the above said facts, the death report of Meenakshamma produced by concerned Gram Panchayath is very important. The certified copy of birth and death register extract is produced before the court, which is marked as Ex.P9. The careful perusal of Ex.P9 clearly shows that Meenakshamma the 14 C.C.No.9993/2011 petitioner was died on 23-3-2010 but not on 23-8-2010. Ex.P9 further establishes the date of death as well as manipulation of death certificate. In order to ascertain the same, the report submitted by the Village Accountant is produced before the court, which is marked as Ex.P10. Ex.P10 also further proves the above said facts.
16. The learned counsel appearing fort the accused has posed a question with regard to ascertaining the genuinity of death certificate by getting a report from FSL, he has posed a question, to which P.W.1 has deposed to the following effect:
Q: Whether to ascertain the genuinity of forging we have got any report from the FSL by obtaining hand writing of the accused ?
Ans: There was no occasion for me to get such a report at that time.
The evidence of P.W.1 as above clearly establishes that he has exercised the powers conferred on him as a judge as provided under the Provisions of Indian Evidence Act and 15 C.C.No.9993/2011 ascertained and come to the conclusion that the death certificate was forged. Moreover, there was no occasion for P.W.1 to get such a report, because the manipulation on the death certificate is visible and can be easily ascertainable. In further cross- examination P.W.1 has deposed to the following effect:
Witness voluntaries that I have obtained death certificate form the concerned Tahsildar and convinced that the date of death was for and forged.
The evidence of P.W.1 further corroborates with regard to action taken by him in getting necessary document to ascertain the creation of death certificate. Therefore, the evidence adduced by P.W.1 as above is more than sufficient to prove that the death certificate was created and produced before the court as an evidence.
17. In order to prove the other offences that the accused has made a false statement before the court given false information and made false claim to release compensation, P.W.1 has produced the certified copies of order sheet in MVC 16 C.C.No.9993/2011 No.5056/2009, which is marked as Ex.P12. The careful perusal of Ex.P12 clearly shows that the accused has made a statement and given memo, LR application by making false statement by giving false information that she is the only daughter of deceased Meenakshamma. Therefore, by making false statement and information is sufficient to attract the offences punishable under Sections 181, 182 of Indian Penal Code
18. In order to prove the offences punishable under Sections 193 of Indian Penal Code, the evidence produced by the accused before the Lok Adalath which is part of judicial proceedings claiming that she is the petitioner and obtained compromise award by the Lok Adalath is sufficient to attract the offence punishable under Section 193 of Indian Penal Code. Admittedly, the Lok Adalath has passed a compromise award on the basis of compromise petition filed before it by the accused as she herself filed the petition produced the evidence before the Lok Adalath, which is a part of judicial proceedings. Therefore, the offence punishable under Section 193 of Indian Penal Code is proved. 17 C.C.No.9993/2011
19. So for as the offence punishable under Section 209 of Indian Penal Code, the false claim made by the accused to pay the compensation deposited by Insurance Company is also proved, because after award passed by the Lok Adalath and after depositing compensation by the Insurance Company before the court, the accused has claimed the same by filing necessary vouchers .
20. So as to prove the offence punishable under Section 465 of Indian Penal Code for forgery the manipulation and correction of date of death of Meenakshamma on Ex.P6 is sufficient. Therefore, the accused is also liable to be punished for the said offence.
21. So far as forgery on record of court or public register as provided under Section 466 of Indian Penal Code, death certificate produced before the court by the accused is a public register and it was forged with regard to the date of death of Meenakshamma. Therefore, Ex.P6 is also proves the said offence. 18 C.C.No.9993/2011
22. So far as forgery of a document for the purpose of cheating is also proved by producing Ex.P6 because by forging the death certificate, making false statement and by giving false evidence before the court, the accused has cheated the court in getting compensation released. Therefore the said offence is also proved.
23. So far as offence under Section 471 is concerned, it is punishable as in the case of forged document as provided under Section 465 of Indian Penal Code. It is also important point to be noted at this stage itself that the counsel appearing for the accused has posed a question in the cross-examination of P.W.1 in page No.3 to which, P.W.1 has deposed to the following effect:
Q: The counsel appearing for the accused might have forged the date of death and death certificate to help the accused ? Ans: I do not know who has forged the date of death but, I was convinced that it was forged, hence, I had action.
The suggestion made by the learned counsel for accused as above is crystal clear that somebody has forged the death 19 C.C.No.9993/2011 certificate with regard to the date of death of Meenakshamma. Once it is admitted that the death certificate is forged and the statement and information given by the accused before the court stating that the she is the only daughter of deceased Meenakshamma, is sufficient to prove that the accused has created and forged the said document but none else. Therefore, viewed from any angle, the evidence adduced by the complainant, both oral and documentary is crystal clear that the complainant has succeeded to prove his case for the offences punishable under Sections 181, 182, 193, 209, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code against the accused. Therefore, in view of the above discussions and reasonings, I am of the firm opinion that the accused is liable to be convicted for the alleged offences.
Accordingly, I answer point No.1 in the affirmative.
24. Point No.2:- In view of my answer on the point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
20 C.C.No.9993/2011
ORDER The accused is found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 181, 182, 193, 209, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code.
For hearing on sentence of accused.
Case will be called after some time.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, revised and then corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 24th day of May 2018).
(V.Jagadeesh) I Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.
Case called again at 3.45 p.m. Heard arguments on sentence.
The counsel for accused is present. The counsel for the accused has submits that lenient view may be taken as the accused has a son and she has dependents and she is aged about 45 years.
The learned Senior APP has also argued vehemently that the alleged offences committed by the accused are before the 21 C.C.No.9993/2011 court and in judicial proceedings and there are no grounds to take lenient view against the accused. Hence, sought to impose maximum punishment as prescribed under the law.
In view of the submission made by the counsel for the accused and the learned Senior A.P.P. and having regard to the facts and circumstances and nature of the offences, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused is convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 181, 182, 193, 209, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable under Section 181 of Indian Penal Code and she shall also liable to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-. In default to pay fine amount, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 20 days. 22 C.C.No.9993/2011
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months for the offence punishable under Section 182 of Indian Penal Code.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 193 of Indian Penal Code and she shall also liable to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-. In default to pay fine amount, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable under Section 209 of Indian Penal Code.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable under Section 465 of Indian Penal Code.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 466 of Indian Penal Code and she shall also liable to pay fine of 23 C.C.No.9993/2011 Rs.2,000/-. In default to pay fine amount, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 468 of Indian Penal Code and she shall also liable to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-. In default to pay fine amount, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable under Section 471 of Indian Penal Code.
All the above said sentences shall run concurrently. Office is hereby directed to furnish copy of the judgment to the accused for free of cost forthwith.
(V.Jagadeesh) I Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of prosecution:-
P.W.1, Shri Chandrashekar;24 C.C.No.9993/2011
List of documents marked on behalf of prosecution:-
Ex.P1, Complaint,
Ex.P1(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P2, Certified copy of petition in MVC No.5056/2009,
Ex.P3, Certified copy of joint memo,
Ex.P4, Award passed by Lok Adalath,
Ex.P5, Certified copy of application filed by the
applicant under Sec.22 Rule 3 of CPC,
Ex.P6, Certified copy of death certificate,
Ex.P7, Certified copy of letter dated 13-10-2010
written to Registrar of Birth and Death,
Ex.P8, Certified copy of memo filed by Advocate for
Insurance Company,
Ex.P9, Certified copy of death report of
Meenakshamma,
Ex.P10, Certified copy of report of Village
Accountant,
Ex.P11, Certified copy of extract of death report,
Ex.P12, Certified copy of order sheet in MVC 5056/209;
Material Objects Produced:- NIL
Witnesses examined on behalf of the defence, documents marked:- NIL.
(V.Jagadeesh) I Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.25 C.C.No.9993/2011
(Judgment pronounced in the Open Court) ORDER The accused is found guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 181, 182, 193, 209, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code.
For hearing on sentence of accused.
Case will be called after some time.
(V.Jagadeesh) I Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.26 C.C.No.9993/2011
Case called again at 3.45 p.m. Heard arguments on sentence.
The counsel for accused is present. The counsel for the accused has submits that lenient view may be taken as the accused has a son and she has dependents and she is aged about 45 years.
The learned Senior APP has also argued vehemently that the alleged offences committed by the accused are before the court and in judicial proceedings and there are no grounds to take lenient view against the accused. Hence, sought to impose maximum punishment as prescribed under the law.
In view of the submission made by the counsel for the accused and the learned Senior A.P.P. and having regard to the facts and circumstances and nature of the offences, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused is convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 181, 182, 193, 209, 465, 466, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable under Section 181 of Indian Penal Code and she shall also liable to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-. In default to pay fine amount, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 20 days.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months for the offence punishable under Section 182 of Indian Penal Code.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 193 of Indian Penal Code and she shall also liable to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-. In default to pay fine amount, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days.27 C.C.No.9993/2011
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable under Section 209 of Indian Penal Code.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable under Section 465 of Indian Penal Code.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 466 of Indian Penal Code and she shall also liable to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-. In default to pay fine amount, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 468 of Indian Penal Code and she shall also liable to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-. In default to pay fine amount, the accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days.
The accused shall under go simple imprisonment for a period of 1 year for the offence punishable under Section 471 of Indian Penal Code.
All the above said sentences shall run concurrently. Office is hereby directed to furnish copy of the judgment to the accused for free of cost forthwith.
(V.Jagadeesh) I ACMM, Bengaluru.28 C.C.No.9993/2011
29 C.C.No.9993/2011