STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. ASPAK @ ASMATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has preferred this appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court i.e. J.M.F.C., Bhatkal in C.C. No. 659/2005 in acquitting the accused for the offences under Section 30(i)(iv) of The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. I have heard the arguments of the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for State. It is very unfortunate that in spite of several opportunities, the respondent did not appear before this Court nor his Counsel appeared before this Court and argued the matter.

(2.) THE learned Additional State Public Prosecutor strenuously contended that the learned J.M.F.C. has not properly assigned the reasons for acquitting the accused person. Though the prosecution has established a case beyond reasonable doubt against the respondent the Trial. Court has grossly erred in acquitting the accused without effectively appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record. The evidence of PWs 1, 2 and 4 have categorically deposed before the Trial Court that the accused has put up construction within 100 (hundred) meters from the monument building. Therefore, he has committed the offence under the above said provision of law. The Magistrate has also grossly erred in coming to the conclusion that the evidence of PWs 1, 2, 4 and 5 are doubtful. Therefore, with all certainty it cannot be said that the accused has committed such an offence, such observation by the learned Magistrate is erroneous. Therefore, the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor strenuously argued that the judgment of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court is liable to be set aside and accused is liable to be convicted for the above said offences.

(3.) THE prosecution in order to prove the case, examined as many as 7 witnesses PW -1 to PW -7 and got marked Ex. P1 to P11. The accused was also examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and the accused did not choose to lead any evidence, as such after hearing the arguments of the learned Counsel for the accused and the learned A.P.P. the Trial Court has acquitted the accused.