Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: MHMM190045742018	MHMM190045742018 Received On 11.04.2018
Registered On 11.04.2018
Delivered On 11.08.2025
Duration 07 Y. 04 M. 00D.
Part A *	Part A *
[Para 44 (i) of Chapter VI of Criminal Manual]	[Para 44 (i) of Chapter VI of Criminal Manual]
Exhibit_____
IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, FIRST CLASS,	IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, FIRST CLASS,
ANDHERI RAILWAY COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI	ANDHERI RAILWAY COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI
(Presided over by Shailja O. Pandey)	(Presided over by Shailja O. Pandey)
Details of FIR/Crime
and Police Station
Crime No.	Crime No. 610 of 2018	610 of 2018
Andheri Railway Police Station,	Andheri Railway Police Station,
Mumbai.	Mumbai.
Date of Judgment 11/08/2025
Case No. C. C. No.1064/PW/2018
CNR.No.	CNR.No.MHMM19-004574-2018	MHMM19-004574-2018
Complainant/
Prosecution
State of Maharashtra,	State of Maharashtra,
Informant:Ankitkumar	Informant:Ankitkumar
Satyendrasingh Baliyan	Satyendrasingh Baliyan
Represented by Mr. A. B. Kamble	Mr. A. B. Kamble
(Learned Assistant Public	(Learned Assistant Public
Prosecutor)	Prosecutor)
Accused Mohit Rasik Manani,	Mohit Rasik Manani,
Age : 26 years, Occ.: Private Job,	Age : 26 years, Occ.: Private Job,
R/o. G/14, Snehonara Society, Dada	R/o. G/14, Snehonara Society, Dada
Bhai Road No. 03, Vileparle (West),	Bhai Road No. 03, Vileparle (West),
Mumbai.	Mumbai.
Represented by Shri. Harish Shetty,
(Learned defence Advocate)	(Learned defence Advocate)
-- 1 of 11 --
2 C.C.No.1064/PW/2018
State Vrs. Mohit Rasik Manani
Mohit Rasik Manani
Judgment
Part B	Part B
Date of offence 02.04.2018
Date of F.I.R. 02.04.2015
Date of Charge-sheet 11.04.2018
Date of Framing of Charge/Particular 02.11.2023
Date of commencement of evidence 27.06.2025
Date of which judgment is reserved 11.08.2025
Date of judgment 11.08.2025
Date of the Sentencing Order, if any ------
Accused Details	Accused Details
Rank
of
the
accu
sed
Name of the
accused
Date of
arrest
Date of
Release on
Bail
Offence
charged
with
Whether
acquitted
or
convicted
Sentence
imposed
Period of
Detention
Undergone
during Trial for
purpose of
Section 428,
Cr.P.C.
1 Mohit Rasik	Mohit Rasik
Manani	Manani
02.04.2018 09.04.2018 393 of
IPC r/w.
Sec.
150(e)
of the
Railways
Act
Acquitted __ __
Abbreviations used in this Judgment (In alphabetical order)	Abbreviations used in this Judgment (In alphabetical order)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Criminal Code
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Evidence Act
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Penal Code
-- 2 of 11 --
3 C.C.No.1064/PW/2018
State Vrs. Mohit Rasik Manani
Mohit Rasik Manani
Judgment
Appendix	Appendix
Part C	Part C
[Para 44 (iii) of Chapter VI of Criminal Manual]	[Para 44 (iii) of Chapter VI of Criminal Manual]
LIST OF PROSECUTION/DEFENCE/COURT WITNESSES	LIST OF PROSECUTION/DEFENCE/COURT WITNESSES
A. Prosecution:	A. Prosecution:
Rank Name Nature of Evidence
PW.1 Ankit Kumar Satendrasingh Baliyan
(Exh.P-04)
Informant
PW.2 Swapnil Aba Honmane(Exh.P-07) Witness
PW.3 Sunil Eknath Patil (Exh.P-08) Witness
PW.4 Ashok Nanu Mane (Exh.P-09) Investigating
Officer
LIST OF PROSECUTION/DEFENCE/COURT EXHIBITS	LIST OF PROSECUTION/DEFENCE/COURT EXHIBITS
A. Prosecution:	A. Prosecution:
Sr.No. Exhibit number Description
1. Exh.P-05 Signature on F.I.R.
2. Exh.P-06 F.I.R.
3. Exh.P-10 Search Panchanama
D. Material Objects:	D. Material Objects:
Sr.
No.
Material Object number Description
1 ------ ---------
-- 3 of 11 --
4 C.C.No.1064/PW/2018
State Vrs. Mohit Rasik Manani
Mohit Rasik Manani
Judgment
J U D G M E N T
( Delivered On : 11/08/2025)
The accused is in the dock is prosecuted by Andheri
Railway Police Station for the offences punishable under section 393
of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 150 (e) of the Railways
Act.
2] Shorn of unnecessary details the prosecution case is as
under-
On 02/04/2018 informant Ankit Kumar Satyendrasingh
Baliyan was on duty between Vilae Parle Andheri Railway Station at
Fatka Point. At around 6.30 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. when the train was
moving from Churchgate towards Andheri, one person tried to
snatched the mobile. The informant caught him and brought him to
RPF Chowki. His name was Mohit Manani.
3] The informant lodged F.I.R. against the accused. On the
strength of the said report the I.O. of the Andheri Railway Police
Station registered Crime No. 610/2018 for the offence punishable
under section 393 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 150
(e) of the Railways Act. The investigation was carried out. During
the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer visited the spot
of occurrence, recorded the statements of witnesses. The
investigation revealed the complicity of the accused and therefore,
charge-sheet was lodged against him.
-- 4 of 11 --
5 C.C.No.1064/PW/2018
State Vrs. Mohit Rasik Manani
Mohit Rasik Manani
Judgment
4] Leveling the variety of allegations and narrating the
sequence of events in all, the prosecution claimed that on
02/04/2018 the accused tried to snatched the mobile of one of the
passenger in the train.
5] My Ld. Predecessor has framed the charge against the
accused on 02.11.2023 for the offence punishable under section 393
of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 150(e) of the Railways
Act. It was read-over and explained to the accused in vernacular
but the accused abjured their guilt and claimed for trial.
6] In the light of the charge against the accused, the
evidence led by the prosecution, and the rival submissions at the
bar, the following points arise for my determination, to which I have
recorded my findings thereon with reasons as follows :-
Sr.No. Points Findings
1. Does the prosecution prove that the
accused on 02.04.2018 at about
18:45 hours at Railway Yard, Near
Andheri Railway Station, Andheri,
Mumbai, attempted to commit
robbery of mobile of victim by hitting
on his hand at the time of his travel
on the foot door of railway and
thereby committed an offence
punishable under section 393 of the
Indian Penal Code ?
No.
2. Does the prosecution prove that the
accused maliciously attempting to
No.
-- 5 of 11 --
6 C.C.No.1064/PW/2018
State Vrs. Mohit Rasik Manani
Mohit Rasik Manani
Judgment
wreck a train by attempting to
commit robbery of mobile of victim
in the running train and thereby
committed an offence punishable
under Section 150(e) of the Railways
Act ?
3. What order ? The accused is
acquitted
: R E A S O N S :
7] To substantiate the guilt of the accused, the prosecution
has examined in all four witnesses viz., Informant Ankit Kumar
Satendrasingh Baliyan (Exh. P-04), Witnesses Swapnil Aba
Honmane (Exh.P-07), Sunil Eknath Patil (Exh.P-08) and
Investigation Officer Ashok Nanu Mane (Exh.P-09) and also relied
on report (Exh.P-06) and Search Panchanama (Exh. P-10).
Thereafter, the prosecution closed the evidence. In rebuttal, the
accused has neither ventured in the witness box nor examined any
witness nor adduced any document. He totally relied on the
prosecution evidence to establish his defence, which consisted of
denial and false implication.
8] A multifold challenge was mounted by the Ld. defence
counsel against the prosecution case. Firstly, according to the Ld.
Counsel, the prosecution failed to prove the incident as the so-called
victim is not examined. Secondly, nothing is recovered from the
possession of the accused inspite of search panchnama. Thirdly, not
a single independent witnesses examined who can corroborate the
-- 6 of 11 --
7 C.C.No.1064/PW/2018
State Vrs. Mohit Rasik Manani
Mohit Rasik Manani
Judgment
prosecution case. Lastly, Ld. defence Counsel urged that accused be
acquitted.
9] Per contra, Ld. A.P.P. submitted with tenacity that the
prosecution has succeeded in establishing the guilt of the accused
beyond the shadow of doubt. The witnesses who are totally stranger
to the accused had no axe to grind against him. There is
overwhelming circumstantial evidence to indicate the connection of
accused to the said crime. The fact that the victim is not examined
does not dilute the gravity of the offence, nor the accused can draw
any mileage. He further argued that, there are sufficient
circumstantial evidence which connect the accused with this crime.
He further urged that, the prosecution has established the whole
chain of circumstances, which shows the involvement of the accused
in this crime. Therefore, he prayed that, the accused may be
convicted.
AS TO POINT NOS. 1 AND 2 :
10] Before proceeding to discuss the evidence of the
prosecution it is appropriate to point out the facts which, are
required to construe the offence of attempt to robbery.
Sec.390 of Indian Penal Code defines the offices of
Robbery which reads as under. - Robbery - In all robbery there is
either theft or extortion.
When theft is robbery :- Theft is “robbery” if, in order to the
committing of the theft, or in committing the theft, or in carrying
away or attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft,
-- 7 of 11 --
8 C.C.No.1064/PW/2018
State Vrs. Mohit Rasik Manani
Mohit Rasik Manani
Judgment
the offender, for that end, voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to
any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant
death or of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint.
When extortion is robbery :- Extortion is “robbery” if the
offender, at the time of committing the extortion, is in the presence
of the person put in fear, and commits the extortion by putting that
person in fear of instant death, of instant hurt or attempt to cause to
any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant
death or of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint.
11] Thus, robbery is a special or aggravated form of either
extortion or theft. The chief distinguishing element in robbery is the
presence of imminent fear of violence. Therefore, for establishing
the offence of attempt to robbery, prosecution is bound to prove
that, (1) There was intend to commit robbery, (2) The accused has
taken substantial steps towards committing robbery, (3) The
attempt to commit robbery must involve the use of threat of
violence, (4) The essential aspect of section 393 is that the robbery
was attempted but not successfully completed.
12] How far the prosecution has gone to prove the case of
attempt to robbery by accused. The evidence on record can provide
legitimate answer. The informant had unfurled the prosecution.
After apprising the Court about his duty and working hours, he
affirmed that on 02/04/2018 at around 6.30 p.m. to 7.00 p.m.
when the train was moving from Churchgate towards Andheri the
accused tried to snatched the mobile of the passenger and therefore
he caught him. He further deposed that he brought the accused to
-- 8 of 11 --
9 C.C.No.1064/PW/2018
State Vrs. Mohit Rasik Manani
Mohit Rasik Manani
Judgment
the police station and lodged F.I.R. against him as he attempted to
commit robbery. In his cross-examination the informant admits that
there was no complaint by any passenger that the accused has tried
to steal his mobile. He further admits that the F.I.R. is silent about
the name or the description of the person who tried to snatch the
mobile. The informant went on the admit that Spot panchnama is
not prepared. The further cross-examination of the informant only
consist of denials.
13] Swapnil Honmane (P. W. 2) and Sunil Patil (P. W. 3) have
lend support to the prosecution case by deposing on the same lines
as that of the informant. Both these witnesses have admitted in the
cross-examination that no spot panchanama is prepared on the spot
and they cannot identify the victim and no one has filed complaint
about the said incident.
14] Lastly, to connect the accused with the said crime
prosecution relied on the testimony of Investigating officer Ashok
Mane (P. W. 4). He deposed that during the investigation it was
revealed that the said offence is committed by the accused and
therefore he filed the charge-sheet. He further deposed that he has
conducted the search of the accused by preparing search
panchnama (Exh. P-10). In his cross-examination he admits that he
has not recorded statement of any independent witness and he has
also not prepared spot panchanama. The further cross-examination
of the investigation officer only consist of denials.
-- 9 of 11 --
10 C.C.No.1064/PW/2018
State Vrs. Mohit Rasik Manani
Mohit Rasik Manani
Judgment
15] On the touchstone of ingredients of attempt to commit
robbery, reverting to the facts of the case, it is pertinent to note that,
there is nothing on record to disclose that the accused has
attempted to commit robbery of mobile phone. Further, there is no
victim before the Court who can claim that the accused attempted
to rob his mobile. Moreover, the entire charge-sheet is silent about
the name, description of the victim as well as the alleged mobile.
Thus, the foremost important ingredient of offence of attempt to
commit robbery i.e. existence of victim and thereby possession of
the mobile with the alleged victim is not established.
16] The entire evidence of prosecution is silent on vital
aspect namely the identity of the accused, the identity of the victim
and time and place of occurrence. Though the informant has no
reason to falsely implicate the accused as the perpetrator of the
crime, but in absence of any victim and case properties, the accused
cannot be connected to the said crime. The evidence and facts on
record, leads to the conclusion, that the accused should get benefit
the doubt. Therefore, I am view that, on the basis of entire evidence
of prosecution no complete chain of circumstances link is
established. Hence, I answer the point Nos. 1 and 2 in the negative.
AS TO POINT NO. 3 :
17] In view of my negative answer to point Nos. 1 and 2, I
hold the accused is not guilty for the offence punishable U/sec.393
of I.P.C. read with Section 150(e) of the Railways Act. The accused
is accordingly entitled to be acquitted for the said offence.
Considering this discussion I proceed to pass the following order :
-- 10 of 11 --
11 C.C.No.1064/PW/2018
State Vrs. Mohit Rasik Manani
Mohit Rasik Manani
Judgment
: O R D E R :
1. The accused is hereby acquitted vide
Section 248(1) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure for the offence punishable
under Section 393 of the Indian Penal
Code read with Section 150(e) of the
Railways Act.
2. His bail bond is cancelled. He be set at
liberty.
3. The accused shall execute a personal
bond and surety bond of Rs. 15,000/- to
appear before Higher Courts as and
when such Court issues notice in respect
of any appeal filed against the Judgment
of this Court, in terms of Section 437-A
of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Sd/-
Mumbai
Dt. 11/08/2025
(Shailja O. Pandey)
Judicial Magistrate, First Class,
Andheri Railway Mobile Court,
Andheri, Mumbai
-- 11 of 11 --