Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No. 1160/PS/2018
Filed on .. 09/03/2018
Registered on .. 09/03/2018
Delivered on .. 21/07/2023
Duration .. 05Y 04M 18D
CNR No.MHMM190031292018
Exh.9
BEFORE 65th METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(Presided over by Hashmi H.A.H.I.)
(Judgment as per Sec. 355 of the Cr.P.C.)
1 The serial number of the
case
: C.C. No.1160/PS/2018
2 The date of commission of
offence
: On 26.09.2017 at about 09.50
hours
3 The name of the
informant, if any
: Through PSO Vileparle Police
Station (CR.No.341/2017)
4 The name of the
accused,his parentage &
residence
: Pramod Prabhakar Aparaj
Age : 47 years
Occupation : Driver
R/o. 702, 7th floor,
Jai Bhavani Kashi Niwas,
Prabhadevi, Mumbai25
5 The offence complained of
or proved
: U/Sec.279 & 304A of the
Indian Penal Code
6 The plea of the accused &
his examination, if any
: Accused pleaded not guilty
7 The final order : As per Final Order
8 The date of such order : 21/07/2023
Appearance : Ld. APP. Samrat Patil for the State
Ld. Adv. Harish Shetty for the accused
-- 1 of 4 --
2 C. C. No. 1160/PS/2018
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 21/07/2023)
1. Following points arise for my determination and I have
recorded findings thereon for the reasons discussed herein after :
SR.NO. POINTS FINDINGS
1 Does the prosecution prove that on
26.09.2017 at about 09.50 hours, near
Cigarette factory, Sahar road, Vileparle
East, Mumbai, accused drove the
motorcycle bearing No. MH 48 AG 276 on
above public road in a manner so rash or
negligent as to endanger human life or to
be likely to cause hurt or injury to any
other person and thereby committed an
offence punishable U/Sec. 279 of IPC ?
Not
proved
2 Whether prosecution prove that on the
above date, time & place, accused accused
caused death of Chandrabhaga Malpekar
by driving above said vehicle which was
rash (or negligent) not amounting to
culpable homicide and thereby committed
an offence punishable U/Sec. 304A of
IPC ?
Not
proved
3 What order ? Accused is
acquitted
-- 2 of 4 --
3 C. C. No. 1160/PS/2018
R E A S O N S
As to points No 1 & 2 :
2. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution
has examined only one witness i.e. Pandurang Dhondu Bhatade as
PW1 at Exh.4.
3. PW1 stated in his evidence that incident took place in the
year 2017. He came to know about the incident from his brother's
wife namely Roshni Ravindra Bhatade at about 09.30 a.m. She
told him that the accident took place of his sister namely
Chandrabhaga Malpekar. Thereafter, he went to Cooper hospital,
but dead body was not available there, therefore, he went to
Sanjeevani hospital at Andheri. When he reached at Sanjeevani
hospital, Doctor told him that she has passed away. He further
stated that he came to know about death of Chandrabhaga that
one blue colour vehicle given dash to her. Thereafter, he lodged
complaint (Exh.5) in the police station Vileparle. But he further
stated that he did not know who given dash to Chandrabhaga.
4. During cross examination, he stated that he did not know
personal knowledge of the incident. When he was present in his
house, he received call from his brother's wife. He did not know
the contents of the statement which was recorded by police.
5. In the present matter, the prosecution has examined the
complainant who not supported to the prosecution case. During
the course of examination, PW1 not stated the vehicle number as
-- 3 of 4 --
4 C. C. No. 1160/PS/2018
well as he did not know who given dash to Chandrabhaga. The
evidence of PW1 is hearsay evidence. The prosecution has not
proved the allegation against the accused. The prosecution has
not proved the basic ingredients of alleged section.
6. Considering all these facts and circumstances, I come to
the conclusion that prosecution has not proved its case beyond
reasonable doubt against the accused for the offences which he has
been charged. Hence, accused is entitled for acquittal. In the
result, in answer to points No.1 & 2 in the negative and for
answering point No.3, I pass following order :
ORDER
1) Accused is acquitted of the offences punishable U/Sec.279 &
304A vide Section 255(1) of the Cr.P.C.
2) Bail bonds of accused stands cancelled.
3) Accused is directed to furnish P.B. of Rs.15,000/ for
appearance before the Hon'ble Appellate Court, in case appeal is
filed against the judgment of this Court vide Section 437(A) of the
Cr.P.C which will be valid for next six month.
4) Judgment dictated & declared in an open Court.
Date : 21.07.2023 (Hashmi H.A.H.I.)
Metropolitan Magistrate
ask 65th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
Dictated &
typed on : 21.07.2023
Signed on : 21.07.2023
-- 4 of 4 --