Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. NO. 282/PW/2019
(Judgment)
MHMM190058582019
Received on : 19/01/2019
Registered on : 19/01/2019 ,
Decided on : 23/02/2022 ,
Duration : 03 Y. 01 M. 04 D.
Exh. : 07
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
RAILWAY MOBILE COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY IMRAN R. MARCHIYA)
(JUDGMENT U/SEC. 355 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
(a) The serial No. of the case; : 282/PW/2019
(b) The date of commission of
the offence;
: 06/03/2018
(c) The name of the complainant
(if any);
: The State (Oshiwara Police Station
in C. R. No. 137/2018).
(d) The name of the accused
persons and their parentage
and residence;
: 1. Gurfan Mohd. Hanif Sikalgar,
Age : 37 Yrs. Occ. : Driver,
2. Kuratlen Mohd. Hanif Sikalgar,
Age : 31 Yrs. Occ. : Housewife,
Both accused r/o. : B/2, Flat No.
301, Alkuz Building, Millat Nagar,
Andheri (West), Mumbai
3. Mohd. Hanif Lal Sikalgar
(Died / abated).
-- 1 of 6 --
2 C. C. NO. 282/PW/2019
(Judgment)
(e) The offences complained of
or proved ;
: Under Sections 323, 354 and 509
read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code.
(f) The plea of the accused and
their examination (if any);
: The accused pleaded not guilty.
g) The final order; : The accused are acquitted.
(h) The date of such order; : 23/02/2022,
Mr. Shah, APP for the State.
Mr. Vijaykumar Dhobi, Advocate for the accused.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 23/02/2022)
1. Accused nos. 1 and 2 are prosecuted for the offences punishable
under Sections 323, 354 and 509 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
2. In brief, it is the case of the prosecution that the informant Bebe
Nurul Chaudhary and the accused are residents of same building. Accused
no.3 is chairman of the building society. There is dispute between accused
no.3 and father of the informant regarding repair work of terrace of the
building. On 06/03/2018 about about 7.00 p.m. mother of the informant
asked accused no.3 as to who has kept the articles on the terrace of the
building. On that count quarrel took place between family of the accused and
the informant. Accused no.1 gave push to chest of the informant. He also
used indecent language against the informant. Accused no.2 forcefully pushed
the door of house of the informant. That door hit to head of the informant and
-- 2 of 6 --
3 C. C. NO. 282/PW/2019
(Judgment)
due to which she sustained injury to her head. After the incident the informant
lodged report of the incident in police station Oshiwara.
3. On the basis of the report given by the informant, crime no.
137/2018 came to be registered against the accused. During investigation I.O.
arrested the accused. He recorded statement of witnesses. After completion of
investigation, I.O. filed chargesheet.
4. During pendency of the case, accused no.3 died on 05/06/2020.
Hence, the case came to be abated against him. I framed charge at Exh. 4
against accused nos. 1 and 2 for the above mentioned offences. The accused
pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution has examined only
the informant. As no incriminating evidence came on record in the evidence of
the prosecution, statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure came to be dispensed with.
5. The points for determination alongwith my findings thereon as
under :
POINTS FINDINGS
1] Does the prosecution prove that the accused
in furtherance of their common intention,
voluntarily caused hurt to the informant ?
No.
2] Does the prosecution prove that the accused
in furtherance of their common intention,
assaulted and used criminal force to the
No.
-- 3 of 6 --
4 C. C. NO. 282/PW/2019
(Judgment)
informant, intending to outraged her
modesty ?
3] Does the prosecution prove that the accused
in furtherance of their common intention,
intending to insult the modesty of the
informant, uttered the indecent and abusive
words for her intending that same shall be
heard by her ?
No.
4] What order ? Accused nos.1 and
2 are acquitted.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NOS. 1 TO 3 :
6. These points are interconnected with each other, therefore, they
are taken up together for consideration and determination.
7. The informant Bebe Chaudhary (P.W.1) deposes at Exh. P06 that
she know the accused persons. They are residents of her building. The
incident took place prior to about 3 years during evening time in their building.
As the incident is old one, she does not recollect much about the incident. She
did not sustain any injury in the incident. Nobody misbehaved with her. F.I.R
dt. 06/03/2018 bears her signature, but she is not aware about its contents. In
the crossexamination by learned A.P.P., the informant denied that at the time
of the incident on 06/03/2018 at about 7.00 p.m. accused no.1 molested her
by pushing her from chest and he also hurled abuses against her. She also
-- 4 of 6 --
5 C. C. NO. 282/PW/2019
(Judgment)
denied that accused no.2 forcefully pushed the door and due to which that
door hit to her head and she sustained injury to her head. During cross
examination of the defence side, the informant stated that the dispute is settled
between her and the accused persons and therefore she does not want to
proceed with the case.
8. I have gone through the record. The case is more than 03 years
old. The informant, her mother and the accused persons have filed
compromise pursis (Exh.5) on record. From the record it is clear that due to
compromise between the parties, the informant has not stated anything against
the accused persons. No any incriminating evidence came on record in the
evidence of the prosecution. The prosecution failed to prove the charges
levelled against the accused. Hence, I answer point nos. 1 to 3 in the negative.
AS TO POINT NO. 4 :
9. The prosecution failed to prove guilt of the accused. Therefore,
the accused are liable to be acquitted. In the result, in answer to point no. 4, I
pass the following order.
ORDER
1] Accused nos.1 and 2 are acquitted of the offences punishable under
Sections 323, 354 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 248
(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2] Bail bonds of accused nos.1 and 2 stands cancelled and they be set at
liberty.
-- 5 of 6 --
6 C. C. NO. 282/PW/2019
(Judgment)
3] Accused nos.1 and 2 to execute P. R. Bond of Rs. 15,000/ each with
one solvent surety vide Section 437 – A of the Code of Criminal
Procedure for appearance before the higher court, if said court issues
notice to them for their appearance in the matter in which present
judgment is challenged, if any.
Place : Mumbai.
Date : 23/02/2022.
(Imran R. Marchiya)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Railway Mobile Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
Dictated On : 23/02/2022,
Transcribed On : 23/02/2022,
Checked and Signed On : 23/02/2022,
-- 6 of 6 --