Bangalore District Court
Mallikarjun vs Yeshchandra on 2 May, 2026
1
C.C.No.6791/2020
KABC030303362020
Presented on : 03-07-2020
Registered on : 03-07-2020
Decided on : 02-05-2026
Duration : 5 years, 9 months, 30 days
IN THE COURT OF III ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU CITY
DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF MAY, 2026
PRESENT.
SRI. SIDDARAMA.S. M.A, LL.M.
III ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
AT BENGALURU CITY
C.C.No.6791/2020
State by Karnataka Peenya Police Station, Bengaluru.
(Represented by Sr. APP)
V/s
Accused Persons 1. Sri.Yash Chandra
S/o Late Pradeep K.R. Soni,
Aged about 45 years,
Vice President,
City Cable Network,
M.G.Road,
Bengaluru-01.
2. Sri.Rajesh Oak
S/o Late Balannambiyar,
DGM Sales and Operations,
2
C.C.No.6791/2020
Aged about 41 years,
City Cable Network,
M.G.Road,
Bengaluru-01.
3. Sri.Nagaraju K.S
S/o Late K.M.Sonnappa,
Aged about 45 years,
Chief Technician,
City Cable Network,
M.G.Road,
Bengaluru-01.
4. Sri.Dinesh Kumar T.R
S/o Raghavaiah,
Aged about 39 years,
Maintenance Incharge,
City Cable Network,
M.G.Road,
Bengaluru-01.
(Reptd., by Sri.K.K.B., Advocate)
Name of the Sri.Mallikarjun
Complainant : S/o Srikantaiah,
Aged about 36 years,
R/at No.202,
4th Cross, 4th Main,
Vidyanagar,
T.Dasarahalli,
Bengaluru.
Date of offence 24.03.2018
Date of offence reported 24.03.2018
3
C.C.No.6791/2020
Date of Commence of 15.04.2026
Evidence
Date of Closure of 15.04.2026
Evidence
Offence Committed Under Section 406, 418, 504, 506
read with section 34 of IPC.
Opinion of Judge Found not guilty.
Complainant by Learned Senior Assistant Public
Prosecutor.
Accused by By Sri.K.K.B., Advocate
(SIDDARAMA.S.)
III ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
AT BENGALURU CITY.
JUDGMENT
The PSI of Peenya Police Station submitted charge sheet
against the accused persons for the offences punishable under
sections 406, 418, 504, 506 read with section 34 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as follows:-
The case of the prosecution is that the complainant was
having the office in the name and style as Madhu Cable
4C.C.No.6791/2020
Network at Andhrahalli Main Road, Indiranagar, Kariobanahalli,Bengaluru. The accused persons were being the officials of
City Cable Network, which provides signal link in respect of all
channels to the local cable operators, by receiving money. The
complainant had entered into an agreement with the accused
persons for providing signal link in respect of the channels from
2015 to 21.09.2017 by paying money. According to the said
agreement, the accused persons were supposed to provide 370
channels through City Cable Network. The complainant had
750 connections. But, the accused persons suddenly
disconnected some channels without any prior notice and
collected money from CW-1. When CW-1, 4 to 8 were inquired
the same to the accused persons, but the accused persons were
abused them in filthy language and gave life threat to them and
thereby the accused persons have committed the criminal
breach of trust, cheated and cause loss to them and committed
the above offences. After completion of the investigation the PSI
of Peenya Police Station has filed the charge sheet against the
accused persons for the offences punishable under sections
406, 418, 504, 506 read with section 34 of IPC.
5
C.C.No.6791/2020
3. Thereafter, the complainant has lodged the
complaint in Peenya Police station. In turn they have registered
the case under Crime No.0154/2018. Thereafter, police visited
the spot, drew the mahazar, secured in the presence of the
accused persons subsequently the accused persons enlarged on
bail. Thereafter, on completion of the investigation, I.O. has
submitted the charge sheet against the accused persons for the
above said offences. After filing the charge sheet, Court has
taken cognizance of the offences against the accused persons
and issued summons to them.
4. The accused persons have appeared before the court
through their counsel. Copy of the prosecution papers were
furnished under Section 207 of Code of Criminal procedure.
Thereafter, heard both side. The charges framed against the
accused persons for the offences punishable under sections
406, 418, 504, 506 read with section 34 of IPC. Read over and
explained to the accused persons were pleaded not guilty and
claimed to be tried.
5. To substantiate the case of the prosecution, the
prosecution have examined the one witness as PW-1 and got
6
C.C.No.6791/2020
marked three documents as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-3. The accused
persons did not choose to lead defense evidence. The statement
of the accused persons under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., is
dispensed with.
6. Heard the arguments from both side and perused
the deposition and documents.
7. After hearing the parties and on perusal of records,
the following points arose for my consideration.
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond
all reasonable doubt that the complainant
was having the office in the name and
style as Madhu Cable Network at
Andhrahalli Main Road, Indiranagar,
Kariobanahalli, Bengaluru. The accused
persons were being the officials of City
Cable Network, which provides signal link
in respect of all channels to the local
cable operators, by receiving money. The
complainant had entered into an
7
C.C.No.6791/2020
agreement with the accused persons for
providing signal link in respect of the
channels from 2015 to 21.09.2017 by
paying money. According to the said
agreement, the accused persons were
supposed to provide 370 channels
through City Cable Network. The
complainant had 750 connections. But,
the accused persons suddenly
disconnected some channels without any
prior notice and collected money from
CW-1 and thereby the accused persons
have committed the criminal breach of
trust and committed the offence
punishable under section 406 read with
section 34 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond
all reasonable doubt that the above said
date, place and time that the complainant
had entered into an agreement with the
8
C.C.No.6791/2020
accused persons for providing signal link
in respect of the channels from 2015 to
21.09.2017 by paying money to them.
According to the said agreement, the
accused persons were supposed to
provide 370 channels through City Cable
Network. The complainant had 750
connections. Thereafter, the accused
persons joined together with common
intention knowing fully well that cause
wrongful loss to the complainant, but the
accused persons suddenly disconnected
some channels without any prior notice
and collected money from CW-1 thereby
the accused persons cheated to CW-1 and
accused persons have committed the
offence punishable under section 418
read with section 34 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond
all reasonable doubt that the above said
9
C.C.No.6791/2020
date, place and time that when the
accused persons suddenly disconnected
some channels without any prior notice
to the complainant and collected money
from CW-1. The complainant inquired the
CW-1 inquired the same to the accused
persons, but the accused persons were
abused him in filthy language and thereby
the accused persons have committed the
offence punishable under section 504
read with section 34 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond
all reasonable doubt that the above said
date, place and time that when the
accused persons suddenly disconnected
some channels without any prior notice
to the complainant and collected money
from CW-1. The complainant inquired the
CW-1 inquired the same to the accused
persons, but the accused persons were
10
C.C.No.6791/2020
abused him in filthy language and gave
life threat to him and thereby the
accused persons have committed the
offence punishable under section 506
read with section 34 of IPC?
5. What order?
8. Heard the arguments and perused the materials
available on records.
9. My findings to the above points are as follows:
POINT No.1 : In the NEGATIVE.
POINT No.2 : In the NEGATIVE.
POINT No.3 : In the NEGATIVE.
POINT No.4 : In the NEGATIVE.
POINT No.5 : As per final order, for the
following:-
REASONS
10. Point Nos.1 to 4:- These above points are inter-
linked with each others and required similar type of
11
C.C.No.6791/2020
appreciation of evidence, Hence, they are taken together for
common discussion.
11. In support of its case, the prosecution has examined
one witness, the PW-1 is the complainant and got marked three
documents i.e., Ex.P-1 is the Complaint, Ex.P-2 is the Spot
Mahazar and Ex.P-3 is the restatement of the complainant.
12. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant
was having the office in the name and style as Madhu Cable
Network at Andhrahalli Main Road, Indiranagar, Kariobanahalli,
Bengaluru. The accused persons were being the officials of
City Cable Network, which provides signal link in respect of all
channels to the local cable operators, by receiving money. The
complainant had entered into an agreement with the accused
persons for providing signal link in respect of the channels from
2015 to 21.09.2017 by paying money. According to the said
agreement, the accused persons were supposed to provide 370
channels through City Cable Network. The complainant had
750 connections. But, the accused persons suddenly
disconnected some channels without any prior notice and
collected money from CW-1. When CW-1, 4 to 8 were inquired
12
C.C.No.6791/2020
the same to the accused persons, but the accused persons were
abused them in filthy language and gave life threat to them and
thereby the accused persons have committed the criminal
breach of trust, cheated and cause loss to them and committed
the above offences. After completion of the investigation the PSI
of Peenya Police Station has filed the charge sheet against the
accused persons for the offences punishable under sections
406, 418, 504, 506 read with section 34 of IPC.
13. In the instant case the PW-1 has turned hostile to
the prosecution case and not supported to the prosecution
case. During the course of cross examination by the learned
Sr. APP nothing has been elicited from his mouth.
14. In this case, the prosecution has failed to elicit
anything favorable to it to prove the allegations against the
accused persons under sections 406, 418, 504, 506 read with
section 34 of IPC. When these being the facts, I am of the
opinion that in total the prosecution has failed to bring home
the guilt of the accused persons beyond all reasonable doubt. In
view of the same, this court hold Point Nos.1 to 4 in the
Negative.
13
C.C.No.6791/2020
15. Point No.5: For the reasons stated and finding given
to point Nos.1 to 4, the following is made.
ORDER
The accused No.1 to 4 are not found guilty
for the offences punishable under section 406,
418, 504, 506 read with section 34 of IPC.
Acting under section 248(1) of Code of
Criminal Procedure the accused No.1 to 4 are
hereby acquitted for the offences punishable
under section 406, 418, 504, 506 read with
section 34 of IPC.
The bail bonds and surety bonds executed
by them stand canceled.
(Directly dictated to the stenographer on computer, typed by him, revised, corrected
and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 2nd day of May, 2026).
(SIDDARAMA.S.)
III ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
AT BENGALURU CITY.
14
C.C.No.6791/2020
ANNEXURE
1. List of witnesses examined for the prosecution:
PW-1 : Sri.Mallikarjuna V.S S/o Srikantaiah.
2. List of witnesses examined for the defense:
– NIL –
3. List of documents exhibited for the prosecution:
Ex.P-1 : Complaint dated 24.03.2018;
Ex.P-1(a) : Signature of PW-1;
Ex.P-2 : Spot Mahazar;
Ex.P-2(a) : Signature of PW-1.
Ex.P-3: Restatement of the complainant.
4. List of documents exhibited for the defense:
– NIL –
5. List of Materials objects exhibited for the prosecution:
– NIL –
(SIDDARAMA.S.)
III ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
AT BENGALURU CITY.
