Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: – 1 – C.C.NO.898/PW/2018
Received on 22/03/2018,
Registered on : 22/03/2018,
Decided on : 18/01/2021,
Duration : 02 Y. 09 M. 26 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.:MHMM190039362018 )
(a) The serial No. of the case; : C.C.NO.898/PW/2018
(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. 142/2017).
(d) The name of the accused
persons and their
parentage and residence;
: Rupesh Gajanan Savarkar
Age 22 Years.
Occupation Nil
R/o.77/11, Bhamhachaitnya
Co.Op.Hsg. Society, SVP Nagar,
Chaar Bunglow, MHADA,
Andheri(W), Mumbai
(e) The offences complained of
or proved ;
: Under Sections 324, 323, 504,
506 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 is acquitted .
..2/
-- 1 of 5 --
– 2 – C.C.NO.898/PW/2018
(h) The date of such order; : 18/01/2021,
Mr. Nandgiri, APP for the State.
Mr. H.M. Shetty, Advocate for the accused.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 18/01/2021)
1. The accused is prosecuted for the offence punishable
under Section 324, 323, 504, 506 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. Mitesh Mahendra
Kapse and his friends were returning home by attending Haldi
ceremony and while removing his motorcycle from the parking place
there is mistaken touch to the accused due to which accused get
annoyed and voluntarily caused hurt to the informant by means of
sharp edge object and kicks. Accused also abused and threatened the
informant . Therefore, the informant lodged report against the accused.
3. On the basis of the report given by the informant, crime no.
142/2017 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.
..3/
-- 2 of 5 --
– 3 – C.C.NO.898/PW/2018
4. The charge is framed against the accused for the above
mentioned offence. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be
tried. The prosecution has examined only one witness in 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 voluntarily caused hurt to the
informant by means of sharp edge
object on his left hand to witness by
means of kick which is used as an
instrument of offence is likely to cause
death.
In the negative
2] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused voluntarily caused hurt to the
informant and his friend? In the negative
3] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused intentionally insulted the
informant by abusing him? In the negative
4] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused committed criminal
intimidation by threatening the
informant of dire consequences?
In the negative
5] What order ? The accused is
acquitted
..4/
-- 3 of 5 --
– 4 – C.C.NO.898/PW/2018
R E A S O N S
AS TO POINT NO. 1 TO 4 :
6. These points are interconnected with each other, therefore,
they are taken up together for consideration and determination.
7. Mr. Mitesh Mahendra Kapse, informant (P.W.1) deposes at
Exh. 04 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 cross
examination 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. Mitesh Mahendra Kapse, 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 does not want to proceed 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 4 in the negative.
..5/
-- 4 of 5 --
– 5 – C.C.NO.898/PW/2018
AS TO POINT NO.5:
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.
O R D E R
1. The accused Rupesh Gajanan Savarkar is acquitted of the
offence punishable under Section 324, 323, 504, 506 of the
Indian Penal Code vide Section 248 (1) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
2. Bail bonds of the accused stands cancelled and he be set at
liberty.
3. The accused to execute P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/( Rupees
Fifteen Thousand only) 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 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
../
-- 5 of 5 --