Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 C.C. NO. 744/PW/2018
(Judgment)
MHMM190031462018
Received on : 06/03/2018,
Registered on : 06/03/2018,
Decided on : 23/03/2021,
Duration : 03 Y. 0 M. 17 D.
Exh. : 15
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; : 744/PW/2018
(b) The date of commission of
the offence;
: Inbetween 05/08/2016 to
28/08/2016
(c) The name of the complainant
(if any);
: The State (Meghwadi Police
Station in C. R. No.284/2016).
(d) The name of the accused
person and their parentage
and residence;
: 1. Vahid Nawab Khan,
Age : 35 Yrs Occ : Service,
R/o : Flat no.201, Anukul
Building, Ganga Complex, Lodha
Road, Miraroad (E), Dist:Thane.
2. Anjum Adil Shaikh,
Age : 36 Yrs Occ : Housewife,
R/o. K.G.N. Tower, R.No. 404,
Pooja Nagar, Miraroad (E), Dist :
Thane.
-- 1 of 8 --
2 C.C. NO. 744/PW/2018
(Judgment)
3. Shafiq Rehman Shaikh,
Age : 42 Yrs Occ : Service,
R/o. B Wing, R.No.301, Rajesh
Co.Op.Hsg. Soc., Income Tax
Colony, Meghwadi, Jogeshwari
(E), Mumbai.
4. Mohd. Ehsan Jan Mohd.
Shaikh,
Age : 44 Yrs Occ : Service,
R/o. 601, A Wing, Sarvoday
Nagar, Rajesh Co.Op.Hsg. Soc.,
Meghwadi, Jogeshwari (E),
Mumbai.
(e) The offence complained of
or proved ;
: Under Sections 498A, and 406
read with section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code.
(f) The plea of the accused and
her examination (if any);
: The accused pleaded not guilty.
(g) The final order; : The accused are acquitted.
(h) The date of such order; : 23/03/2021,
Mr. Gosavi, APP for the State.
Mr. Kerkar, Advocate for the accused.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 23/03/2021)
1. The accused are prosecuted for the offences punishable under
Sections 498A and 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
-- 2 of 8 --
3 C.C. NO. 744/PW/2018
(Judgment)
2. In brief, it is the case of the prosecution that the informant
Shahista Khan got married with accused no.1 on 31/07/2016 as per
Muslim Rites. Accused no.2 is sister, accused nos. 3 is cousin brother and
4 is brotherinlaw of accused no.1. After marriage since 06/08/2016 the
accused started to illtreat to the informant. Accused no.1 started to tease
the informant by saying that gift articles given by her parents are of poor
quality. He used to verbally abuse and beat the informant. Accused no.2
used to illtreat the informant for demand of money. Accused nos. 1, 3
and 4 forced the informant to give in writing that she is having love affair
with one Zuber. The accused persons also illegally retained stridhan of
the informant. Lastly, the informant lodged report against the accused in
police station Meghwadi.
3. On the basis of the report given by the informant, crime no.
284/2016 came to be registered against the accused. On 18/12/2016 I.O.
seized stridhan of the informant which was produced by accused no.1
himself in police station. During investigation I.O. recorded statement of
witnesses. He arrested the accused. After completion of investigation,
I.O. filed chargesheet against the accused.
4. I framed charge (Exh.2) against the accused for the offences
punishable under sections 498A and 406 read with section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be
tried. The prosecution has examined four witnesses. The statement of
the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure came to
be recorded at Exh. 11 to 14. The defence of the accused is that of total
denial and that the matter is settled between the parties.
-- 3 of 8 --
4 C.C. NO. 744/PW/2018
(Judgment)
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,
subjected the informant to cruelty ?
No
2] Does the prosecution prove that the accused
were entrusted with the stridhan of the
informant and the accused in furtherance of
their common intention, converted the said
stridhan for their own use ?
No
3] What order ? The accused
are acquitted.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NOS. 1 AND 2 :
6. These points are interconnected with each other, therefore,
they are taken up together for consideration and determination.
7. The informant Shahista Khan(P.W.1) deposes at Exh.P05
that she got married with accused no. 1 in the year 2016 at Jogeshwari
(West), Mumbai. Accused no.2 is sister, accused nos. 3 and 4 are brothers
of accused no. 1. After marriage she went to the house of the accused for
cohabitation at Miraroad. She was residing in the joint family of the
-- 4 of 8 --
5 C.C. NO. 744/PW/2018
(Judgment)
accused. She stayed at the house of the accused for 26 days after the
marriage. After marriage the accused were demanding dowry. They were
making allegations against her that she is having affair with some other
person. The accused were threatening her by showing knife. They were
compelling her to say that she is having affair with other. The accused
were demanding the house in the dowry. The accused were also
demanding Rs. 20 Lacs or Rs. 25 Lacs. After 26 days of the marriage the
accused called her family members and they sent her with them to her
parental house. Lastly she lodged F.I.R.(Exh.6) against the accused.
8. Saifuddin Shaikh (P.W.2) deposes at Exh. P07 that t he
informant is his daughter. After marriage there was matrimonial dispute
between the informant and accused persons. He has no details of that
matrimonial dispute. Shabana Shaikh (P.W.3) deposes at Exh. P08 that
the informant is her younger sister. After marriage the married life of the
informant was going on smoothly for the period of one month. She is not
aware about any matrimonial dispute between the informant and the
accused. She is not aware as to why the informant lodged F.I.R. against
the accused.
9. I.O. PSI Ramesh Jadhav (P.W.4) deposes at Exh. P09 that o n
02/09/2016 he was posted at police station Meghwadi as PSI. On that
day he recorded F.I.R. (Exh.6) on the basis of the report given by the
informant Shahista Khan. That report was in respect of physical and
mental harassment to her at the hands of the accused. On 18/12/2016
accused no.1 produced stridhan of the informant in police station and he
seized the same under panchanama (Exh.P10). He conducted
investigation of the crime. He arrested the accused. He recorded
-- 5 of 8 --
6 C.C. NO. 744/PW/2018
(Judgment)
statement of witnesses. After completion of investigation he filed charge
sheet. After investigation it transpired that the accused persons subjected
the informant to cruelty for demand of motorcycle and money.
10. I have gone through the evidence of the prosecution
witnesses. The evidence of the informant is general in nature. The
informant has not stated any particular incident of the alleged ill
treatment. Further, there is no corroborative evidence on record.
Saifuddin Shaikh (P.W.2) is father of the informant. He has not supported
the case of the prosecution. He has stated that he has no details of the
matrimonial dispute between the informant and the accused. Shabana
Shaikh (P.W.3) is elder sister of the informant. She also did not supported
the case of the prosecution. She has stated that she is not aware about the
matrimonial dispute between the informant and the accused and she is not
aware as to why the informant lodged F.I.R. against the accused. The
evidence of I.O. PSI Ramesh Jadhav (P.W.4) is of formal nature. The
informant has filed compromise pursis (Exh.3) on record. In her cross
examination also the informant stated that due to settlement between her
and the accused, she does not want to proceed with the case.
11. As stated above, the evidence of I.O. is of formal nature and
other two witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution. There
is only evidence of the informant on record against the accused. The
evidence of the informant is also not clear and convincing. The
uncorroborated evidence of the informant is not sufficient to prove cruelty
as explained under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The
informant has not stated anything regarding her stridhan. Therefore, I
hold that the prosecution failed to prove the charges levelled against the
-- 6 of 8 --
7 C.C. NO. 744/PW/2018
(Judgment)
accused. Hence, I answer point nos. 1 and 2 in the negative.
AS TO POINT NO. 3 :
12. The prosecution failed to prove guilt of the accused.
Therefore, accused are liable to be acquitted. As per record stridhan of the
informant is already handed over to her as per the order of the court. She
is entitled to retain the same. In the result, in answer to point no. 3, I pass
the following order.
ORDER
1) The accused are acquitted of the offences punishable under
Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code vide Section
248 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2) Bail bonds of the accused stands cancelled and they be set at
liberty.
3) The accused 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.
Place : Mumbai.
Date : 23/03/2021.
(Imran R. Marchiya)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Railway Mobile Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 7 of 8 --
8 C.C. NO. 744/PW/2018
(Judgment)
Dictated On : 23/03/2021,
Transcribed On : 23/03/2021
Checked and Signed On : 23/03/20211
-- 8 of 8 --