Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: – 1 – C.C.NO.731/PW/2018
Received on : 06/03/2018,
Registered on : 06/03/2018,
Decided on : 18/01/2021,
Duration : 02 Y. 10 M. 12 D.
Exh. :
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
44th COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY A. I. SHAIKH)
(JUDGMENT U/SEC. 355 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
(CNR NO.:MHMM190028532018 )
(a) The serial No. of the case; : C.C.NO.731/PW/2010
(b) The date of commission of
the offence;
: 29/04/2017
(c) The name of the
complainant
(if any);
: The State (Varsova Police Station
in C. R. No. 134/2017).
(d) The name of the accused
persons and their
parentage and residence;
: 1. Mitesh Mahendra Kapse
Age 29 Years.
Occupation Estate Agent
R/o.G/3, Shilpkar Society,
R.T.O.Lane, Chaar Banglow,
Andheri(W), Mumbai
2. Sumit Ashok Dhuri
Age 29 Yrs.
Occupation – Estate Agent
R/o.Plot No.49, R.No.21, SVP
Nagar, MHADA,Charr Bunglow,
Andheri(W), Mumbai
..2/
-- 1 of 7 --
– 2 – C.C.NO.731/PW/2018
3. Aman Naeem Khan
Age – 28 Yrs.
Occupation Modeling
R/o. Society No.75, R.No.D/4,
MHADA, Chaar Bunglow,
Andheri(W), Mumbai.
4. Prashant Mallikarjun Bhise
Age 28 Yrs.
Occupation Estate Agent,
R/o. Bldg. No.14/A/3, Manish
Village, Manish Nagar, Chaar
Bunglow, Andheri(W), Mumbai
5. Ravi Dinkar Kamble
Age 29 Yrs.
Occupation Estate Agent
R/o.Society No.79, R.No.23,
SVP Nagar,MHADA, Chaar
Bunglow, Andheri(W), Mumbai
(e) The offences complained of
or proved ;
: Under Sections 143, 147,
149,323, 504, 506(2) 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; : 18/01/2021,
Mr. Nandgiri, APP for the State.
Mr. J.P.Jayswal, Advocate for the accused.
..3/
-- 2 of 7 --
– 3 – C.C.NO.731/PW/2018
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 18/01/2021)
1. The accused No.1 to 5 are prosecuted for the offence
punishable under Section 143, 147, 149, 323, 504, 506(2) of the Indian
Penal Code.
2. In brief, it is the case of the prosecution that on
29/04/2017 at about 23.00 hrs. at opposite Sumero Building,
Footpath, towards Siddharth Nagar, SVP Nagar, MHADA, Chaar
Bunglow, Andheri(W), Mumbai while informant Shri. Rupesh Gajanan
Savarkar went to eat salad at that time all the accused were athe
member of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common
object to beat the informant due to previous enmity voluntarily caused
hurt to the informant by hands and kicks. Accused also abused the
informant and accused No.2 threatened the informant of dire
consequences. Therefore the informant lodged report against the
accused.
3. On the basis of the report given by the informant, crime no.
134/2017 came to be registered against the accused. During
investigation I.O. drawn spot panchanama in presence of panch
witnesses. He arrested the accused persons. During further
investigation I.O. recorded statement of witnesses. After completion of
investigation, I.O. filed chargesheet.
4. The charge is framed against all the accused for the above
mentioned offence . The accused No.1 to 5 pleaded not guilty and
claimed to be tried. The prosecution has examined only one witness in
..4/
-- 3 of 7 --
– 4 – C.C.NO.731/PW/2018
this case. As there is no incriminating evidence against the accused
come on record the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure is dispensed with.
5. The points for determination alongwith my findings
thereon as under :
Sr.No. POINTS FINDINGS
1] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused were the members of an
unlawful assembly and in prosecution
of their common object to beat the
informant due to previous enmity?
In the negative
2] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused were the members of an
unlawful assembly and in prosecution
of their common object to beat the
informant due to previous enmity
committed offence of rioting ?
In the negative
3] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused were the members of an
unlawful assembly and in prosecution
of their common object to beat the
informant due to previous enmity
voluntarily caused hurt to the
informant?
In the negative
4] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused were the members of an
unlawful assembly that in prosecution
of their common object to beat the
informant due to previous enmity the
accused intentionally insulted the
informant by abusing him?
In the negative
5] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused were the members of an
unlawful assembly that in prosecution In the negative
..5/
-- 4 of 7 --
– 5 – C.C.NO.731/PW/2018
of their common object to beat the
informant due to previous enmity
accused No.2 committed criminal
intimidation by threatening the
informant of dire consequences?
6] What order ? The accused No.1 to 5
are acquitted.
R E A S O N S
AS TO POINT NO. 1 TO 5 :
6. These points are interconnected with each other, therefore,
they are taken up together for consideration and determination.
7. Mr. Rupesh Gajanan Savarkar, informant (P.W.1) deposes
at Exh. P07 that incident taken place prior to two years at MHADA,
Versova at about 11.00 p.m. At that time his friend's sister wedding
ceremony was going on. All of sudden at the place of incident there
was fighting of many people and somebody has beaten him from his
back side on his hand. Therefore, he had filed complaint to the Police
Station. It bears his signature. However, he does not its contents. In
his crossexamination he admitted that there is compromise between
him and accused outside the Court, hence he do not want to proceed
with the case
8. I have carefully gone through the record. The case is more
than 02 years old. The prosecution has examined only one witness i.e.
Mr. Rupesh Gajanan Savarkar, informant (P.W.1). However, his
evidence is very formal in nature. He admitted that now compromise
took between them outside the Court and he do not want to proceed
..6/
-- 5 of 7 --
– 6 – C.C.NO.731/PW/2018
with the present case. The prosecution failed to produce any direct
evidence against the accused. The prosecution failed to adduce any
further evidence to prove the case of prosecution. Hence, I hold that
the prosecution failed to prove guilt of the accused. Hence, I answer
point Nos.1 to 5 in the negative.
AS TO POINT NO.6:
9. The prosecution failed to prove guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt. Therefore, the accused are liable to be acquitted. In
the result, in answer to Point No.6, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1 The accused No.1 Mitesh Mahendra Kapse, accused No.2 Sumit
Ashok Dhuri, accused No.3 Aman Naeem Khan, accused No.4
Prashant Mallikarjun Bhise and accused No.5 Ravi Dinkar
Kamble are acquitted of the offence punishable under Section
143, 147, 149, 323, 504, 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code vide
Section 248 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2 Bail bonds of the accused No.1 to 5 stands cancelled and they
be set at liberty.
3 The accused No.1 to 5 to execute P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/
( Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each vide Section 437–A of
the Code of Criminal Procedure for appearance before the
higher court, if said court issues notice to him for his
..7/
-- 6 of 7 --
– 7 – C.C.NO.731/PW/2018
appearance in the matter in which present judgment is
challenged, if any.
The Judgment is transcribed directly on the computer and
pronounced in open Court.
Sd/
Mumbai ( A. I. Shaikh )
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Date:18/01/2021 44 th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
vnh
Typed on : 18/01/2021
Signed on : 18/01/2021
../
-- 7 of 7 --