Manoj Kumar vs State - 2023 Supreme(Kar) 1222

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Kar) 1222

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
K.Natarajan, J.
Manoj Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 101 of 2023 Connected with Criminal Appeal No. 102 of 2023 Connected with Criminal Appeal No. 206 of 2023 Connected with Criminal Appeal No. 228 of 2023 Connected with Criminal Appeal No. 231 of 2023 in Criminal Appeal No. 101 of 2023
Decided On : 30-08-2023

Advocates appeared:
T.Prakash, Advocate, Vishnu Murthy, Advocate, S.Vishwa Murthy, Advocate

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 374(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120B, 364A, 395, 397 read with Section 149 - Appeals filed by accused against conviction - Trial Court convicted the appellants for conspiracy, abduction, and dacoity after an alleged robbery involving substantial theft from a finance company's strongroom - Prosecution's evidence heavily relied on the testimony of the complainant and a host of police investigations - The Court found inconsistencies and contradictions in witness testimonies and a lack of credible evidence linking the accused to the crime, leading to reasonable doubt regarding their involvement. (Paras 1, 11, 88)

Findings of Court:
Prosecution failed to establish the charges against accused beyond reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies in witness accounts and absence of corroborative evidence. (Paras 87, 88)

Issues: The main issues include the credibility of the complainant's testimony, delay in lodging the complaint, and lack of independent witness support in proving the charges. (Paras 12, 88)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the inconsistencies and the improbability of the prosecution's case warranted the extension of the benefit of the doubt to the accused, resulting in the acquittal of all charges. (Paras 87, 88)

Result: Appeals allowed; accused acquitted of all charges.

JUDGMENT

1. These appeals are filed by appellants-accused Nos.1 to 8 and 10 under Sec. 374(2) of Cr.P.C. for setting aside the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the LVI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore in S.C.Nos.158/2010 clubbed with S.C.547/2011 for having found the appellants guilty and convicted for the offences punishable under 7 Ss. 120B, 364A, 395, 397 read with Sec. 149 of IPC.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellants and learned High Court Government Pleader for the State.

3. The appellants are accused and respondent is the complainant-State, the rank of the parties before the Trial Court is retained for the sake of convenience.

4. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Halasuru Sub-Division filed the charge sheet against the appellant-accused persons alleging that the complainant-CW.1/P.W.3 being the Branch Manager of Muthoot Mini Nidhi Finance, situated at No.120, 1st floor, Alfa Diamond Plaza, New Thippasandra Road, Bangalore that on 2/6/2009, in the evening at 5.30 p.m., after locking the strong room and the main door, while he was returning to his house in his Honda Activa scooter bearing No.KA-03-EK-3890 by keeping the office keys in the dickey of the said scooter, when he was proceeding near Indira Nagar, accused Nos.6 and 9 followed him in a motor bike bearing No.KA-02- ED-15 and dashed to the vehicle of CW.1, due to which, he fell down. At that time, accused Nos.3, 7 and 8 came in a white colour Maruthi Omni van bearing No.KA-03-M-8138 and abducted the CW.1 to Malur Road under the guise of providing treatment. Accused No.7 poured the spirit on the face of CW.1 in the said Omni van. Accused Nos.3 and 7 assaulted the complainant-CW.1, by threatening him forcibly took the cash of Rs.20, 000.00 and snatched the mobile phone from him, then pushed out CW.1 from the Omni Van. Thereafter, the accused went near the scooter of the complainant where he was lying, took the keys of Muthoot Mini Nidhi Finance from the scooter and also strong room keys from the dickey of the said scooter. Then accused Nos.1 to 10 assembled and then went to the Muthoot Finance office, opened the main door and committed the dacoity of golden ornaments weighing 40kg and 490 grams worth of Rs.5, 68, 40, 000.00 and escaped from the spot. During the investigation, the police arrested the accused persons. The case against accused No.9 was split up, he died during the trial. Accused No.10 was later arrested and a separate charge sheet has been filed in S.C.No.547/2011 and accused Nos.1 to 8 were tried in S.C.No.158/2010. The charges were framed, they denied the charges and claimed to be tried. Accordingly, the prosecution examined 42 witnesses as per PWs.1 to 42, got marked 74 documents as per Exs.P.1 to 74 and 42 material objects as per M.O.Nos.1 to 42. After closing the evidence, the statement under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. The case of the accused is one of the total denial, but not examined any witnesses except marking Ex.D.1.

5. After hearing the arguments, the Trial Court found the appellants guilty and convicted as under:

(ii) They also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 9 years and to pay fine of Rs.10, 000.00 each for the offence punishable under Sec. 364(A) of IPC.

(iii) They also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 9 years and to pay fine of Rs.10, 000.00 each for the offence punishable under Sec. 395 of IPC.

(iv) They also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years for the offence punishable under Sec. 397 of IPC and in default of payment of fine, they shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 year. All the sentences are ordered to run concurrently.

6. Being aggrieved with the judgment of conviction and sentence