JAI PRASAD Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals are directed against the Judgment passed by the learned Presiding Officer, FTC -XVII, Bengaluru in S.C.504/2008 dated 06.10.2010 wherein the accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 395 of IPC and accused No.2 in S.C.No.305/2009 was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 395 of IPC.

(2.) It is necessary to place on record that originally final report came to be filed against five persons. However, accused No.4 died during the trial and case against him was abated. At the same time accused No.2 absconded and split charge sheet was filed against him and separate Sessions case number was allotted in S.C.No.305/2009. However, he was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 395 of IPC. Thus, the present appeals are from the original case S.C.No.504/2008, insofar as accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 are concerned, they have respectively preferred appeals in Crl.A.No.1099/2010, Crl.A.No.1128/2010 and Crl.A.No.1162/2010 as they were found guilty and convicted for the offence punishable under Section 395 of IPC.

(3.) The proceedings under criminal law came to be initiated because of the incident dated 25.07.2007 on the strength of the complaint filed by one Smt.Shobha, aged 32 years, wife of Siddagangaiah, Door No.515, 3rd Main, 16th Cross, Kalyananagar, Bengaluru. Complainant is a resident in the address stated above. Her husband works as lineman at KEB, Kunigal. She works for a Women Organization. On 25.07.2007, the complainant and other family members were watching TV by keeping the door open. At that time about six boys abruptly entered into the house. Sarojamma raised voice saying somebody came by that time, all the uninvited entrants closed the door and they were holding knives and threatened if we shouted, they would stab. The complainant and family members were frightened and kept quiet. One of the entrants took Sarojamma inside the kitchen and stood by her side. Saraswati @ Supriya, daughter of complainant was sent inside the room. Insofar as complainant is concerned one person showed knife and asked how much money she kept with her and shell down the jewels. Complainant took out cycle design gold neck chain of 11 gms and gold ring of 2.5gms with white stone studded and another ring of 2gms with red stone were removed and given to him. One person went inside the room and asked what was in the Beeru and there was cash of Rs.3,700/- and complainant opened Beeru and gave Rs.3,700/-. One among them took away the following jewels: