Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 Judgment in C. C. No.963/PW/2018
Filed on .. 02.04.2018
Registered on .. 02.04.2018
Delivered on .. 11.08.2026
Duration .. 08Y 04M 09D
CNR No. MHMM-1900-4145-2018
Exh.7
IN THE COURT METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
65th COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(Presided over by Hashmi H.A.H.I.)
(Judgment as per Sec. 355 of the Cr.P.C.)
(a) The serial number of the
case;
: C.C. No.963/PW/2018
(b) The date of commission of
offence;
On 17.11.2017
(c) The name of the informant,
if any;
: Through PSO Andheri Police
Station (CR No.587/2012)
(d) The name of the accused
person, his parentage and
residence;
: Irfan Ansari @ Lalu Rafiq Ansari
–28 yrs
Occupation : Nil
R/o.: Sagar City, Gilbert Hill Road,
D.N. Nagar, Andheri (W), Mumbai
(e) The offence complained of
or proved;
: U/Sec.379 of the Indian Penal
Code.
(f) The plea of the accused and
his examination, (if any);
: Accused pleaded not guilty
(g) The final order; : Accused is acquitted
(h) The date of such order; : 11.08.2026
Appearance : Ld. APP. Prakash Shejal for the State
Ld. Adv. Shri. Namey for the accused
-- 1 of 5 --
2 Judgment in C. C. No.963/PW/2018
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 11.08.2026)
1. Accused has been charge-sheeted for the offence punishable
U/Sec. 379 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”).
The prosecution case in short is as follows :-
On 17.11.2017 the informant viz. Ansh Manish Sharma has
lodged the report in Andheri police station contending therein that, on
17.11.2017 at about 13.40 hrs., when he was proceeding towards his
house and came in front of MacDonald shop, on Skywalk, Sahar Road,
Andheri (E), Mumbai, one unknown person dishonestly taken a mobile
of black colour of Redmi Company Note 4, worth Rs.8,000/- from his
bag without his consent. Therefore, the informant has lodged report
against the unknown person. On the basis of complaint Andheri Police
station has registered an offence bearing Crime No.587/2017. During
the investigation, the Investigating Officer has arrested the accused,
prepared seizure panchanama and recorded the statement of witnesses.
After completion of investigation, I.O. has submitted charge-sheet
against the accused.
2. My Learned Predecessor has framed charge against the
accused vide Exh.2 on dtd. 14.05.2018 and it read over and explained
to accused in vernacular, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to
be tried. His defence is of total denial and false implication.
3. As there is no any incriminating evidence against accused,
therefore statement of accused U/sec. 313 of Criminal Procedure Code
stands dispensed with.
-- 2 of 5 --
3 Judgment in C. C. No.963/PW/2018
4. Following points arise for my determination and I have
recorded findings thereon for the reasons discussed herein after :-
S.NO. POINTS FINDINGS
1 Does prosecution prove that, on 17.11.2017 at
about 13.40 hrs., in front of Macdonald
shop,on Skywalk, Sahar Road, Andheri (E),
Mumbai, accused intending to take dishonestly
a mobile of black colour of Red Me Company
Note 4, worth Rs. 8,000/- belonging to the
informant out of his possession and thereby
committed an offence punishable U/Sec.379
r/w Sec.34 of IPC ?
...Not
proved
2 What order ? Accused is
acquitted
R E A S O N S
As to points No. 1 and 2 :
5. In order to prove guilt of the accused, the prosecution has
examined in all two witnesses i.e. P.W. No.1 Ansh Manish Sharma at
Exh.4 and P.W. No.2 Sanjay Aanaji Halde at Exh.6.
6. P.W. No.1 informant Ansh Manish Sharma has deposed that
the incident has occurred on 17.11.2017 at Andheri station sky walk at
about 01.40 p.m. He has noticed that zip of his bag was opened. His
mobile i.e. Redmi note 4 was missing. He has contacted station master
and checked CCTV footage, but it was no used. Thereafter, he went to
-- 3 of 5 --
4 Judgment in C. C. No.963/PW/2018
police station and lodged report. FIR Exh. 5 bears his signature. He
further deposed that he has received his mobile phone. The defence
counsel has not examined this witness.
7. Thereafter, prosecution has examined P.W. No.2 Sanjay
Aanaji Halde who deposed that on 17.11.2017 he was attached to
Andheri Police Station as a police Naik. One person viz. Ansh has lodged
the report that his mobile phone has removed by someone else from the
bag. On the basis of his report, the offence bearing no.587/2017 came
to be registered against unknown person and Shri. Yashwant Patil, PSI
has investigated the offence. When the said person came to the police
station, at that time, he was present in the police station. The defence
counsel has declined to cross examine this witness.
8. It is pertinent to note that, the prosecution has not examined
the investigating officer who investigated the offence as well as the panch
witnesses of the panchanama. It is very fatal to the prosecution case.
Moreover, the evidence of prosecution witness of P.W.No.1 that he has
checked the CCTV Footage of Andheri Station Skywalk, however, it was not
useful for him. This witness has not stated about the accused. The
prosecution has not brought on record any evidence to connect the
involvement of the accused in the commission of the crime. So far as the
evidence of prosecution witnesses are concerned, it is not helpful to the
prosecution. The prosecution has miserably failed to prove the guilt of the
accused beyound all reasonable doubt. Considering facts and
circumstances, I come to the conclusion that prosecution has not proved
the case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt, therefore, I
answered point No.1 is in the negative and for answering point No.2, I
pass following order :-
-- 4 of 5 --
5 Judgment in C. C. No.963/PW/2018
ORDER
1) Accused viz. Irfan Ansari @ Lalu Rafiq Ansari is acquitted
vide Section 248(1) of the Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable
U/Sec. 379 of the Indian Penal Code
2) Bail bond of accused stands cancelled. Cash security
be refunded to the accused, if any, after appeal period is
over.
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.
4) Seized muddemal i.e. Redmi mobile already returned to
it’s original owner on supurtnama vide order dtd. 19.03.2018
(259/N/2018). Said supurtnama be retained.
5) Judgment dictated & declared in an open Court.
Date. 11.08.2026 (Hashmi H.A.H.I.)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
65th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
ask
Dictated &
typed on : 11.08.2026
Signed on : 11.08.2026
-- 5 of 5 --