IN THE COURT OF THE II AJCJ – CUM – X ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
CYBERABAD, AT KUKATPALLY, RANGAREDDY DISTRICT
PRESENT: T. Murali Mohan, II AJCJ-Cum-X Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District at Kukatpally.
DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
CC.No. 1096 of 2018
Between: Sri M. Venkata Ramana S/o M. Narayana, Aged: about 46 years, Occ: Private Employee R/o H.No. 14-20-677/219A, Vivekananda Nagar, Borabanda, Hyderabad. …Complainant AND A1:Y.Ramesh Babu, S/o: Y.Malla Reddy, Age: 48years Occ: Vice President of Glory Galaxy School, R/o: 8330, Jana Priya Metroplis, Erragadda, Hyderabad-500018, also at Glory Galaxy School, H.No: 14-20-677/259, Vivekananda Nagar, Borabanda, Hyderabad.
A2.Glory Armily Silvia (Alias Mahima), W/o: Y.Ramesh Babu, Age: 54 years, Occ: President of Glory Galaxy School, Both R/o: 8330, Jana Priya Metropolis, Erragadda, Hyderabad 500018 also at Glory Galaxy School, H.No: 14-20-677/259, Vivekananda Nagar, Borabanda, Hyderabad.
…Accused
This case is coming on this day before me final hearing on 04.08.2022 in the presence of Sri M. Venkata Ramana, Complainant- Party-in-Person and Sri G. Srinivas Reddy, learned counsel for the accused and upon perusal of the material on record and the matter having stood over for consideration till this day, this Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
This complaint filed by the complainant under section 200 of Code of
Criminal Procedure against A1 and A2 for the offences punishable under sections 338 and 420 IPC.
2.The avernments of the complaint in brief are that, on 31.03.2016 around 9.30 am while the complainant was proceeding on his TVS Jive motor cycle bearing No. AP 09CD6389 to his office and when he reached near to
Manhattan Furniture shop, 100 feet road, Ayyappa Society, Hyderabad, one
Unknown car hit to the motor cycle of the complainant due to which the
CC.No. 1096 of 2018 II AJCJ-CUM-X AMM,
R.R.District Kukatpally complainant sustained collar bone fracture and he was for bed rest for about 90 days. It is further submitted that the complainant suspected that A1 and A2 intentionally done the above accident
3.The complaint further discloses that the complainant has filed the report in this regard before the police for which a case in Cr.No. 95/2017 for the offence under section 338 IPC was registered. The police, Madhapur have not considered the content of the complaint and statement of the complainant and its contents which categorically establish the involvement of the vehicle bearing No.
AP 13AC 9799 but the police colluded with the accused and filed final report as
UN-DECTECTED and notice of the said final report was issued to the complainant on 15.05.2017.
4. In the year 2012 he got admission for his daughter by name M.
Shreeja in her UKG in M/s Glory Galaxy School, situated at Vivekannanda Nagar,
Borabanda, which is near to his house.
5.The accused No.1 and No.2 are husband and wife and they are the
Vice resident and President of Glory Education Society. It is also submitted that the complainant has filed OS.No. 2041/2016 on the file of Prl.Senior Civil Judge,
L.B.Nagar for recovery of amount of Rs. 8,78,650/- against A1 and A2 and the same is pending. The complainant was working as software engineer and he got acquaintance with A1 and A2 when he got admission of her daughter in their school. The accused offered the complainant in the year 2014 to invest an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- for 25% share in their school business accordingly, the complainant invested an amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- by way of NEFT transfer on 28.01.2014 and the remaining amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- through NEFT transfer from his account on 07.03.2014 for which A2 executed promissory notes and A1
CC.No. 1096 of 2018 II AJCJ-CUM-X AMM,
R.R.District Kukatpally stood as guarantor and they assured that they will allot 25% share in the school business with the advice of auditor. The complainant has waited for 2 months and enquired with the accused for the investment made by him then the accused disclosed they will give 5% share in the school business in read of 25% share but he refused and demanded for return of the amount then the accused sought some time and assured to pay @ 3% per month on Rs. 5,00,000/- , accordingly A2 executed an affidavit dated 04.04.2014 admitting the above amount as hand loan and that the interest will be paid at the end of every quarter (i.e. every 3 months) and the principal amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- will be paid within 2 years i.e. on or
before 28.01.2016 and 07.03.2016 respectively. The accused paid interest
amount of Rs. 55,500/- on 09.06.2014, Rs. 45,000/- on 10.09.2014 and Rs.
45,000/- on 11.12.2014 i.e. till 28.11.2014. In the month of February,2015 next due date as agreed, the complainant approached A1 then A1 told the complainant that that they are unable to pay the interest amount, however, the accused will pay two quarters amounts at a time. The accused No.2 issued two cheques bearing No. 076883 dated 11.01.2016 for an amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- and a cheque bearing No. 076884 dated 11.01.2016 for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- drawn on Allahabad Bank, Maruthi Nagar branch, Yousufguda, Hyderabad in favour of the complainant.
6.The complainant on 04.08.2015 approached A1 and demanded for payment of interest due to the complainant then A1 asked him to wait for some time in the school premises and called his henchmen, forcibly taken him into a room and brutally beaten, threatened, scrolled with the help of 6 persons and took his personal information including a diary from his pocket and detained him.
After his release, he lodged a report before the police Sanath Nagar and they registered a case in Cr.No. 383/2015 under sections 324,342, 504 r/w 34 IPC. The said crime was registered as CC.No. 1279/2015 and the same is pending before the Hon’ble XXIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Kukatpally.
CC.No. 1096 of 2018 II AJCJ-CUM-X AMM,
R.R.District Kukatpally
7.The complaint further discloses that the complainant has presented the said cheques on due date with his banker SBH, Gayathri Nagar, Hitech City
Branch but his utter surprise the said cheques were returned unpaid vide return memo dated 13.01.2016 for the reason “exceeds arrangements” and when the same was informed to the accused they bluntly refused to pay any amount. The complainant got issued legal notice dated 08.02.2016 to the accused and as the accused failed to comply with the notice, the complainant filed complaint vide
CC.No. 226/2016 (CC.No. 198/2017) under 138 of N.I. Act, pending on the file of VI
Special Magistrate, Cyberabad, Kukatpally, at Miyapur.
8.It is further submitted that A1 and A2 having received amount for their business and despite having sufficient means, intentionally avoided to pay the amounts. The accused closed down their 5 branches schools located at SR
Nagar, Kalyan Nagar, Madhura Nagar, Hyderabad, Siddarth Nagar, S.R. Nagar,
Vengalrao Nagar, S.R. Nagar and Anjaneya Nagar, Moosapet, Hyderabad and they have been cheating many persons and he made complaints many times to MEO and Dy.E.O and D.E.O and collector who issued show cause notice and no action was taken. The accused have caused mental agony, and financial crises, therefore, prayed to punish the accused for the offences under sections 338 and 420 IPC.
9.Basing on the sworn statements of the complainant and another witnesses, the case was taken on file for the offence punishable section 338 IPC against the accused.
10.On appearance of the accused, copies of the case documents as required under section 207 Cr.P.C were furnished to him. The accused was
CC.No. 1096 of 2018 II AJCJ-CUM-X AMM,
R.R.District Kukatpally examined under section 251 CrPC. The accusation for the offence under section 338 IPC was explained to them to which they denied and claimed to be tried.
11.During the course of trial, the complainant himself got examined as
PW1 and got marked Ex.P1 to P18 on his behalf. The defense did not examine any witnesses and no exhibits were got marked on their behalf.
12. After closure of prosecution evidence, the accused were examined under section 313 CrPC on the incriminating material appeared against them, to which the accused denied and reported no evidence to be adduced on their behalf .
13.Heard the arguments of learned APP and the learned defence counsel.
14.Now the point for determination is whether the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt?
Point :
15.The case of the prosecution is that the accused have caused the accident to the complainant which resulted in causing injury to his collar bone of
PW1. The complaint in order to establish the present case against the accused has relied upon his own testimony examined as PW1.
16.The testimony of PW1 is replica of the complainant referred supra, therefore the above complaint is read as part and parcel as the chief evidence of
PW1. During the cross examination of PW1, he categorically admitted that the alleged accident was took place on 31.03.2016 and the complaint in this case
before the police was lodged on 25.06.2017 with the delay of 13 months but he
testified that he sent Emails to ACP and DCP about his accident yet no action from there end on the said emails. He further admitted during his cross
CC.No. 1096 of 2018 II AJCJ-CUM-X AMM,
R.R.District Kukatpally examination, that he had not mentioned in his complaint that he made complaint
before ACP and DCP with regard to the above accident. His cross examination
further categorically reveals that he could not lodge the report due to bed ridden for 90 days. He also admitted that he had not mentioned in his complaint that while he was proceeding on his motor vehicle at Ayyappa Society one car came and hit from his back side due to which he fell down from the bike. His cross further evident that he had not mentioned in his complaint that he had witnessed the driver of the car at that moment. So, also he had not mentioned the injury sustained by him in his complaint therefore, on appreciation of the above, evidence of PW1 though discloses that he had met with an accident on 31.03.2016 and he had obtained treatment at Gandhi Hospital, Hyderabad which supported by ExP4 and the injury alleged to have sustained by him as mentioned under ExP5 however, in order to establish the present case it is very much essential to identify the driver who had caused the accident and also to establish the rash and negligent of driver of the alleged car but the evidence of PW1 does not disclose about the registration number of alleged car which caused the accident and also the driver who had caused the accident. Moreover his cross examination categorically establishes that he had not witnessed the driver of the alleged car. Therefore, this court found that the evidence of PW1 does not establish the identity of the accused as the driver of the car in question and also registration number of the car with which the accident was alleged to have occurred to him.
17.The evidence of PW1 and complaint filed by the complainant discloses about other material such as some financial transactions between A1,
A2 and the complainant and filing of Civil cases by the complaint against the accused and also cheque bounce cases by the complainant in respect of the above transactions and though the present complain was filed by the complainant against A1 and A2 for the offences under sections 338 and 420 IPC but this court
CC.No. 1096 of 2018 II AJCJ-CUM-X AMM,
R.R.District Kukatpally considering the material on record took cognizance for the offence under section 338 IPC alone, therefore, this court found that the above material is not relevant to present case.
18.It is further evident from the material on record that the present case was taken on file for the offence under section 338 IPC against A1 and A2 but on appreciation of the material on record there is no specific ovet act of A1 and A2 in commission of alleged offence and also the evidence of PW1 and material on record does not establish that A1 and A2 had driven the vehicle and caused the accident, therefore, the present case in the absence of their identity, cannot be held as proved against the accused.
19.So, considering the discussion made above and in the absence of the identity of the driver and also the car alleged to have caused the accident and its registration number it cannot be held that the accused are the driver of the car in question and caused the accident, therefore, this court held that there is cogent and substantial evidence on record, Hence, this court is of considered view that the complainant has failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
In the result, A1 and A2 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under section 338 IPC and accordingly, A1 and A2 are acquitted under section 255 (1) CrPC. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand cancelled under section 437-A CrPC. No property is produced ,as such no orders as to disposal of the case property.
Dictated to Personal Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected and
pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 17th day of August, 2022.
II AJCJ–CUM–X ADDL.METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
R.R.DISTRICT AT KUKATPALLY.
CC.No. 1096 of 2018 II AJCJ-CUM-X AMM,
R.R.District Kukatpally
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
FOR PROSECUTION:
1. PW1 is Sri M.Venkata Ramana
FOR DEFENCE: -Nil-
EXHIBITS MARKED
FOR PROSECUTION:
1. Ex.P1 is the Certified copy of FIR and report in Cr.No. 383/2015 along with report, dated 04.08.2015. 2.Ex.P2 is the Certified copy of charge sheet in Cr.No: 383/2015
3. Ex.P3 is the certified copy of report submitted to the Deputy commissioner of police, Cyberabad.
4. Ex. P4 is the Medical prescription of Gandhi Hospital 5.Ex.P5 is the Digital X ray report
6. Ex.P6 is the attested copy of death certificate of G.Srinivasulu Chetti 7.Ex.P7 is copy of complaint submitted to Asst. Commissioner of police, Cyberabad, Balanagar Division
8. Ex.P8 is the copy of the complain to the Sanath nagar police station
9. Ex.P9 is the HDFC bank Statement 10.Ex.P10 is the ICICI bank statement 11.Ex.P11 is the certified copy of the promissory note dated 28.01.2014
12. ExP12 is the certified copy of the promissory note dated 07.03.2014 13.ExP13 is the Affidavit executed by Glory Armily Simpia dated 04.04.2013 14.ExP14 is the certified copy of the cheque bearing No. 076883, dated 11.01.2016
15. ExP15 is the certified copy of the cheque bearing No. 076884, dated 11.01.2016
16. ExP16 is the Glory School Savra Shiksha Abyam form
17. ExP17 is the copy of show cause notice dated 27.07.2016
18. ExP18 is the protest petition.
FOR DEFENCE: -Nil-
MATERIAL OBJECTS MARKED:
-Nil-
II AJCJ–CUM–X ADDL.METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
R.R.DISTRICT AT KUKATPALLY.
CC.No. 1096 of 2018 II AJCJ-CUM-X AMM,
R.R.District Kukatpally
FORM NO. 71
CALENDER AND JUDGMENT
CALENDER OF CASES TRIED BY THE II AJCJ-CUM-X ADDL. METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, CYBERABAD,RANGA REDDY DISTRICT KUKATPALLY.
Explanation of delay and remarks:Delay caused due to the non-production of witnesses by the prosecution. Offence:338 IPC Date of Report:28.02.2017 Apprehension of accused:Issued 41 A crpce dated 07.08.2015 Released on bail:- Commencement of Trial:25.01.2019 Close of Trial:23.11.2021 Date of Judgment:18.08.2022 Sentence: In the result, A1 and A2 are found not guilty for the offence punishable under section 338 IPC and accordingly, A1 and A2 are acquitted under section 255 (1) CrPC. The bail bonds of the accused shall stand cancelled under section 437-A CrPC. No property is produced ,as such no orders as to disposal of the case property CC. No.:1096 of 2018 Name of the accused:A1: Y.Ramesh Babu A2: Glory Armily Silvia Finding:Acquittal
II AJCJ – CUM – X ADDL. METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
RANGA REDDY DISTRICT AT KUKATPALLY.
To The Hon’ble Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, at L. B. Nagar, Hyderabad.
Lr. Dis. No. ……………/2022, dt: / /2022.
CC.No. 1096 of 2018 II AJCJ-CUM-X AMM,
R.R.District Kukatpally
CC.No. 1096 of 2018 II AJCJ-CUM-X AMM,
R.R.District Kukatpally