Display PDF

CC-214-2010 1
IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &

JMFC AT K.G.F.
Present: Sri.H.GOPALAKRISHNA, B.Sc., LL.B.,

Prl.Senior Civil Judge & JMFC., KGF.
Dated this the 1st day of December 2010
CC.No. 214/2010
Comlainant: State by Robertsonpet Police

(Represented by..A.D.P)
Vs.
Accused : 1. Rajesh S/o Manohar No.47.
2. Pinto @ Manibharathi S/o
Kubendran, 22 years, No.45
3. Kalaivanan S/o Venkatesh, 24
years, No. 88, 3rd cross
4. Appyan @ Karthikeyan, 20
years, No.40,
All are R/at Ambedkar Nagar,
Robertsonpet, K.G.F.
(Represented by Sri. M.C.D., Adv.)
JUDGEMENT
This is a charge sheet filed by the PSI of Robertsonpet

police station against the accused for the offence P/u/s
323, 324, 326 r/w 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case that within
the limits of the Robertsonpet police station on 15.11.2009
at 5.30 p.m., while CW.1 was going on the road near
Mariyamma Temple at Ambedkar Nagar, in the meantime
the accused with an common intention have picked up a
CC-214-2010 2
quarrel with him in connection with the previous enmity

and all of them assaulted the CW1 with their hands and
the accused No.1 assaulted the CW.1 on his cheek, mouth
and neck with his steel bangle wearing in his hand and
caused him to sustain bodily pain and bleeding injury
which is grievous in nature and thereby the accused have
committed the offences as stated in the above supra.
3. After submitting the charge sheet the cognizance
taken and process was issued. The accused have appeared
before the court and got released on bail. All the copies
were furnished to the accused u/s 207 of Cr.PC. The
arguments before charge were heard. As there is sufficient
materials on record, thus the charges were framed, for
which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be
tried. Hence the matter was posted for the evidence.
4. In order to prove the guilt of the accused the
prosecution has examined lonely witness as per PW-1 and
got marked one document at Ex.P-1 and 2 and closed their
side evidence. As the PW.1 is complainant/injured victim
has totally turned hostile to the prosecution. As there is no
any incriminating evidence found against the accused thus
the statement required u/s 313 of Cr.Pc dispensed with
and the matter was posted for arguments.
5. I have heard the arguments and perused the
records.
Now the following points arise for my consideration:

CC-214-2010 3
1: Whether the prosecution proves that the

accused has committed the offences
p/u/s 323, 324, 326 r/w 34 of IPC
beyond all reasonable doubts?
2: What order?
My findings on the above points are hereunder:-
Point No-1: In the Negative

Point No-2: As per the final order for the following
REASONS
6. POINT NO-1: As I have already noted in the supra

that there is no any incriminating evidence found against
the accused and the PW.1 is said to be complainant/victim
and material witness, but unfortunately he has totally
turned hostile to the prosecution and there is nothing in
the cross-examination of this witness by the prosecution to
support the case of them, but for showing that the said
witness is unreliable one. Absolutely on record there is no
iota of evidence, which are cogent and legal one to convict
the accused. Hence I am of the clear opinion that the
prosecution has miserably failed to bring home the guilt of
the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence I answered
this point is in the negative.
7. Point No-2: In view of the my findings on point
No.1, in the result I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER
CC-214-2010 4
Acting under section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C

the accused No.1 to 4 are acquitted for the
offences punishable under section 323, 324,
326 r/w 34 of IPC. Their bail bonds stand
cancelled.
The property seized under PF
No.82/2009 one Steel bangle shall be
confiscated to State after expiry of the appeal
period.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer and typed by her,
corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court on this the 1st day
of December 2010)
(H.GOPALAKRISHNA)
PRL. SENIOR C. J & JMFC. KGF
ANNEXURE
List of witnesses examined and documents marked on
behalf of the prosecution:-
PW1: Kalaivanan
Ex.P1: Complaint
Ex.P1a: Signature of PW1
Ex.P2: Statement of PW.1
Ex.P2a: Signature of PW.1
List of MO’s identified by the prosecution:- NIL

List of witnesses examined and documents marked on
behalf of the accused- NIL
(H.GOPALAKRISHNA)
PRL. SENIOR C. J & JMFC, K.G.F.
CC-214-2010 5

Display PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Display PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Display PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CC-214-2010 1

IN THE COURT OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &

Present: Sri.H.GOPALAKRISHNA, B.Sc., LL.B.,

Dated this the 1st day of December 2010

Comlainant: State by Robertsonpet Police

(Represented by Sri. M.C.D., Adv.)

This is a charge sheet filed by the PSI of Robertsonpet

quarrel with him in connection with the previous enmity

Now the following points arise for my consideration:

1: Whether the prosecution proves that the

My findings on the above points are hereunder:-

Point No-1: In the Negative

6. POINT NO-1: As I have already noted in the supra

Acting under section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C

List of MO’s identified by the prosecution:- NIL

You might also like