Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 Judgment in C. C. No.1133/PW/2018
Filed on .. 20.04.2018
Registered on .. 20.04.2018
Delivered on .. 06.10.2023
Duration .. 05Y 05M 16D
CNR No.MHMM190049602018
Exh.
BEFORE 65th METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
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.1133/PW/2018
(b) The date of commission of
offence;
On 04.07.2017
(c) The name of the informant,
if any;
: Through PSO Andheri Police
Station (CR No.360/2017)
(d) The name of the accused
person, his parentage and
residence;
: 1.Devnarayan Radheshyam
Tripathi
Age : 32 years
Occupation : Driver
2. Deepankar Rantdev Tiwari
Age : 32 years
Occupation : Nil
3. Shashi Rakesh Pandey
Age : 36 years
Occupation : Housewife
All Res of Naigon (E), Virar,
Dist Palghar.
(e) The offence complained of
or proved;
: U/Sec. 325,504,506 r/w. 34 of the
Indian Penal Code
(f) The plea of the accused and
his examination, (if any);
: Accused pleaded not guilty
(g) The final order; : As Per Final Order
h) The date of such order; : 06.10.2023
-- 1 of 6 --
2 Judgment in C. C. No.1133/PW/2018
Appearance : Ld. APP. Samrat Patil for the State
Ld. Adv. Ajit Dalvi for the accused
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 06.10.2023)
1. Accused have been chargesheet ed for the offences
punishable U/Sec.325,504,506 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for
short “IPC”).
The prosecution case in short is as follows :
On 04.07.2017 when informant Mohd. Akbar Jafar Siddhiqui
was proceeding towards Panipat Maidan, Old Nagardas Road, Andheri
(E), Mumbai by his motorcycle, at that time driver of motorcar bearing
no. MH48F3519 alongwith his associates on account of accident being
made quarreled with them. They assaulted him by iron rod and fists
blows also as well as abused him. Accused assaulted the informant's wife
by kick. They also threatened the informant “rsjs xkMhdk uacj gekjs ikl
gS] rq ft/kj Hkh feysaxk uk rq>s NksMqaxk ugh”. Therefore, the informant
went to Andheri Police station and lodged FIR. As per FIR, Crime
No.360/2017 u/s.325,504,506 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code
registered against the accused. Thereafter, Investigating Officer
recorded statement of witnesses, prepared spot panchanama and
collected medical certificate of the informant and after completion of
investigation submitted chargesheet against the accused.
2. I have framed charge against the accused vide Exh.2 and it
read over and explained to accused in vernacular, to which he pleaded
not guilty and claimed to be tried. Their defence is of total denial and
false implication.
-- 2 of 6 --
3 Judgment in C. C. No.1133/PW/2018
3. Since no incriminating evidence against accused, therefore
statement of accused U/sec. 313 of Criminal Procedure Code stands
dispensed with.
4. Following points arise for my determination and I have
recorded findings thereon for the reasons discussed herein after :
S.NO. POINTS FINDINGS
1 Whether prosecution proves that on
04.07.2017 at 18.30 hrs., at Panipat Maidan,
Old Nagardas Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai in
furtherance of their common intention
voluntarily caused grievous hurt to informant
viz. Mohd. Akbar Jafar Siddiqui by rod and
thereby committed an offence punishable
u/sec.325 r/w. 34 of IPC ?
...Not
proved
2 Whether prosecution proves that on the above
date, time & place, accused in furtherance of
their common intention insulted the informant
and witness by words and knowing it to be
likely that such provocation will cause
informant to break public peace and thereby
committed an offence punishable u/sec. 504
r/w 34 of IPC?
...Not
proved
-- 3 of 6 --
4 Judgment in C. C. No.1133/PW/2018
3 Whether prosecution proves that on the above
said date, time & place, accused in furtherance
of their common intention, committed criminal
intimidation by threatening informant and
witness and thereby committed an offence
punishable U/Sec. 506 r/w Sec.34 of IPC ? ...Not proved
4 What order ? Accused are
acquitted
R E A S O N S
As to points No. 1 to 4:
5. In order to prove guilt of the accused, the prosecution has
examined one witness i.e. P.W. No. 1 Mohd. Akbar Ahmad at Exh.7.
Thereafter, the prosecution filed evidence closed pursis, therefore,
evidence of prosecution closed by passing order below Exh.1.
6. P.W. No.1 informant Mohd. Akbar Ahmad is the material
witness. In his examination in chief, he deposed that incident had
occurred in the year 2018 at Gaondhivali, Andheri (E). At that time, he
was proceeding towards Andheri (W) from Jogeshwari through old
Nagardas Road. At the relevant time, he was driving two wheeler
alongwith his wife. He further deposed that at old Nagardas road, the
traffic was jammed, suddenly one car dashed to his vehicle. Thereafter,
public gathered there. Thereafter, he alongwith his wife went to the
police station and lodged the report against accused. It is at Exh.8 but
he didn't know it contents. As the witness not supported the prosecution
case hence Ld. A.P.P. sought the permission to crossexamine him.
-- 4 of 6 --
5 Judgment in C. C. No.1133/PW/2018
During his crossexamination, he denied that accused caused injury to
him by iron rod and also abused him. He further admitted that the
matter has been settled amongst them out of court and there is no
dispute between him and accused person and he didn't want to proceed
with this matter.
7. From the record it appears that the informant is not
supporting to the prosecution case. Moreover, nothing incriminating
evidence came on record against the accused. It is also pertinent to note
that from the evidence of prosecution, it appears that the compromise
took place between informant and accused, therefore, the prosecution
has not examined further evidence in this matter. It also appears that
there are cross cases. Therefore, considering facts and circumstances, I
come to the conclusion that prosecution has not proved the case against
the accused beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, I answered points No.1
to 3 are in the negative and for answering point No.4, I pass following
order :
ORDER
1) Accused viz. 1.Devnarayan Radheshyam Tripathi
2. Deepankar Rantdev Tiwari and 3. Shashi Rakesh
Pandey are acquitted vide Section 248(1) of the Cr.P.C. for
the offences punishable U/Sec.325,504,506 r/w. 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
2) Bail bonds of accused are stands cancelled.
-- 5 of 6 --
6 Judgment in C. C. No.1133/PW/2018
3) Accused are directed to furnish P.B. of Rs.15,000/ each
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) Judgment dictated & declared in an open Court.
Date : 06.10.2023 (Hashmi H.A.H.I.)
Metropolitan Magistrate
65th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
ask
Dictated &
typed on : 06.10.2023
Signed on : 06.10.2023
-- 6 of 6 --