Bangalore District Court
Bengaluru City vs Alleging That He Has Committed The ... on 26 July, 2022
C.C.No.5153/2016
KABC030133132016
Presented on : 25-02-2016
Registered on : 25-02-2016
Decided on : 26-07-2022
Duration : 6 years, 5 months, 1 days
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY.
Dated this 26th day of July 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.5153/2016 Date of commission of the
2. 27.12.2015 offence (As per F.I.R.) Magadi Road Police Station,
3. Name of the complainant Bengaluru City.
Thimmaraju S/o Thimmaiah, Aged about 55 years, R/at No.67, 12th Cross,
4. Name of the accused Sanjeevini Nagara, Behind Om Shakthi Temple, Hegganahalli, Bengaluru.
Sections 323, 324, 341, 504 The offences complained
5. and 506 of the Indian Penal of Code.
2 C.C.No.5153/2016
6. Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
7. Final order Accused is acquitted
8. Date of order 26.07.2022 The Police Sub-Inspector of Magadi Road Police Station, Bengaluru has filed Police Report against the above named accused alleging that he has committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The Prosecution case in brief is that on 27.12.2015 at 11.00 a.m., in front of the house of CW1- Smt.Venkatalakshmi bearing No.4, situated at 1 st 'B' Main, 2nd Cross, Cholurupalya, Bengaluru City within the territorial jurisdiction of Magadi Road Police Station, the accused came and abused her filthy languages; demanded her to vacate the house otherwise, he will show an end to her; when CW1 tried to went inside the house, the accused wrongfully restrained her; voluntarily caused simple hurt on her back by beating with his hand; dragged her and at that time, she has sustained bleeding injuries on her hand as the bangle pieces pears her hand. Thereby, the accused has committed the 3 C.C.No.5153/2016 offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Based on the First Information of CW1, the crime was registered in Crime No.473/2015 at Magadi Road Police Station. On completion of the investigation, the Police Sub- Inspector of Magadi Road Police Station, Bengaluru City filed Police Report against the accused alleging that he has committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. After taking cognizance of the said offences, the process was issued to the accused. He has appeared before this Court and enlarged on bail. The copies of the Police Report and other prosecution papers are furnished to the accused under section 207 of Cr.P.C. After hearing, since there were grounds for presuming that the accused has committed offences triable by this court, charges for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code has been framed and read over to him in Kannada language. He has pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.
4 C.C.No.5153/2016
4. To prove the charges framed against the accused, the prosecution has produced the oral evidences of PW1 to PW3 and the documentary evidences in Ex.P1 to Ex.P4. After completion of the prosecution evidences, for the purpose of enabling the accused personally to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidences of the prosecution against him, examined the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. The accused has submitted that he has no defense evidence. Heard the arguments of learned Senior Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the accused. Perused the materials available on record.
5. The points for determination are;
1. Whether prosecution has proved the offences charged against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code beyond reasonable doubt?
2. What order or sentence?
6. My answers to the above points are as follows: 5 C.C.No.5153/2016
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 framed against the accused, out of 10 witnesses cited in the charge- sheet by the Investigation Officer, the prosecution has produced the oral evidences of only three witnesses before this court as PW1 to PW3. Among them, PW1 Dr.Kiran is the doctor who gave treatment to PW2 for the injuries sustained in the alleged incident, PW2 Venkatalakshmi is the First Informant, injured and the mahazar witness and PW3 Nagabhushan Reddy is the eyewitness of this case. The prosecution has also produced the documentary evidences Ex.P1 to Ex.P4. Among them, Ex.P1 is the Wound Certificate, Ex.P2 is the First Information, Ex.P3 is the Spot Mahazar and Ex.P4 is the statement of PW3.
8. As per the case of the prosecution, based on Ex.P2 given by PW2, the crime has been registered in Crime No.473/2015 and on investigation, since, there are evidences collected by 6 C.C.No.5153/2016 the Investigation Officer to prosecute the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, the charge-sheet was filed. In the First Information - Ex.P2, there are statements of PW2 with regard to the alleged incident committed by the accused. PW2 during her examination-in-chief has deposed the evidences contrary to the said facts. She deposed in her examination-in-chief that due to petty differences between her and the accused, she gave first information to the Police as per Ex.P2. She has also deposed in her examination-in- chief that she does not know the contents of Ex.P2. She has also deposed in her examination-in-chief that the police have not conducted any mahazar at the place of incident in her presence as per Ex.P3 and not seized anything. She has been considered as hostile witness and cross-examined at the request of the prosecution. During cross-examination, she has denied the contents of Ex.P1; she gave it; the mahazar conducted at the place of incident and seizer of bangle pieces. PW2 has admitted in her cross-examination that she has compromised the matter with the accused. 7 C.C.No.5153/2016
9. As per the case of the prosecution, PW3 is the husband of PW2 and the eyewitness of the incident. He has deposed that he has not witnessed the incident and he as not given any statement to the police. He has also been considered as hostile witness and cross-examined at the request of the prosecution. Nothing has been elicited in his cross- examination supporting the case of the prosecution. His witness statement recoded by the Investigation Officer is marked as Ex.P4.
10. PW1 has deposed in his examination-in-chief about the injuries sustained by PW2, the said injuries are simple in nature and he gave Wound Certificate as per Ex.P1. Nothing has been elicited in the cross-examination of PW1.
11. On perusal of the above evidences, it appears that the First Informant, injured and one of the eyewitnesses of the incident PW2 and PW3 have deposed not supporting the case of the prosecution and they have deposed in their cross- examination that they have compromised the matter with the 8 C.C.No.5153/2016 accused. Therefore, if the evidences of the other prosecution witnesses are recorded, no purpose will be served. For this reason, the evidences of the other prosecution witnesses are dropped. Under these circumstances, I am holding that the prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, I answer Point No.1 in the Negative.
12. POINT No.2 :- For the reasons stated in Point No.1, the prosecution has not proved the guilt of the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, the accused is not found guilty for the aforesaid offences charged against him. In the result, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDERS Under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C, the accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 9 C.C.No.5153/2016 324, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
His bail bonds and cash surety furnished under Section 436 of Cr.P.C. will be in force till completion of the appeal period and thereafter, it shall be canceled.
The bangle pieces seized in PF No.150/2015 are ordered to destroy after appeal period.
(Typed by the Stenograph in the Court computer on my direct dictation, printout taken, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on 26.07.2022) (VEDAMOORTHY B.S.) II Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.
ANNEXURE Witnesses Examined on behalf of Prosecution :-
PW1 : Dr.Kiran,
PW2 : Venkatalakshmi,
PW3 : Nagabhushan Reddy,
Documents marked on behalf of Prosecution :-
Ex.P1 : Wound Certificate,
Ex.P1(a) : Signature,
10 C.C.No.5153/2016
Ex.P2 : First Information,
Ex.P2(a) : Signature,
Ex.P3 : Spot Mahazar,
Ex.P3(a) : Signature,
Ex.P4 : Statement of the witness.
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.11 C.C.No.5153/2016
26.07.2022 Judgment pronounced in open Court vide separate order.
ORDERS Under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C, the accused is hereby acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 12 C.C.No.5153/2016 324, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
His bail bonds and cash surety furnished under Section 436 of Cr.P.C. will be in force till completion of the appeal period and thereafter, it shall be canceled.
The bangle pieces seized in PF No.150/2015 are ordered to destroy after appeal period.
(VEDAMOORTHY B.S.) II Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City.