Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No. 1196 / PW / 2018.
C/S filed on : 02.05.2018.
Decided on : 26.08.2019.
Duration : 1 Y, 3 M & 24 D
Exh. 8
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
10TH COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY R. R. KHAN)
(a) The serial number of the
case.
: C. C. No. 1196 / PW / 2018.
(b) The date of the commission
of the offence.
: 21.02.1995.
(c) The name of the Informant. : The State (Juhu Police Station
in C. R. No.136/1995)
(d) The name of the accused
person and his parentage
and residence;
: Maruti Shripati Sarang,
Age : 54 years, Occ : Agriculture,
Res : At Lotewadi, TalBhudargad,
DistKolhapur.
(e) The offence complained of : Under section 408 of the
Indian Penal Code.
(f) The plea of the accused and
his examination.
: The accused pleaded not
guilty.
(g) The final order : The accused is acquitted.
(h) The date of such order : 26.08.2019.
(i) Brief statement of reasons : As recorded herein below.
Assistant Public Prosecutor : Shri P. S. Sapkale.
Advocate for the accused : Shri Sujay Namey.
JUDGMENT UNDER SECTION 355 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL
PROCEDURE.
The accused is facing trial for the offence punishable under
section 408 of the Indian Penal Code.
-- 1 of 3 --
2 C. C. No. 1196 / PW / 2018.
2 In order to prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has
examined only one witness. The evidence of PW1 Nagesh Maruti
Misal at Exh.5 came to be recorded. It is matter of record that the
informant, aggrieved Prakash Eknath Kamat has been reported
untraceable vide Exh.4 filed by prosecution. Similarly, other
relevant witnesses are also reported untraceable vide Exhs.6 and 7.
Lastly, prosecution has examined its Investigating Officer. As no
incriminating evidence has come on record against the accused,
hence, his statement under section 313 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure is dispensed with. I have heard Shri P. S. Sapkale, Ld.
APP for the State and Shri Sujay Namey Ld. Advocate for the
accused at length. I have perused the evidence on record very
minutely and carefully.
3 In so far as evidence on record is concerned, PW1 Nagesh is
the Investigating Officer of this case. He has formally deposed
about the filing of chargesheet as a sequel of his investigation.
Except this he has not deposed a single word against accused and
more particularly in respect of offence allegedly committed by
accused. Noticeably, this case is related with the offence occurred
on 21.02.1995. During investigation nothing came to be recovered
from the accused. The offence consists of a meager amount of
Rs.15,000/ allegedly misappropriated by the accused.
Furthermore, there is no substantial evidence against accused for
want of evidence of informant and other relevant witnesses. In
such situation the charge leveled against accused cannot be proved
-- 2 of 3 --
3 C. C. No. 1196 / PW / 2018.
beyond all shadow of doubt. Hence, I am satisfied to acquit the
accused by passing following order
O R D E R
i Accused Maruti Shripati Sarang is acquitted
of the offence punishable under section 408 of the
Indian Penal Code vide Sec. 248 (1) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
ii Bail bonds of the accused stand cancelled.
iii The accused shall furnish bonds of
Rs.10,000/ under section 437(A) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
Sd/
Dt. 26.08.2019. (R. R. Khan)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
Sat.
Dictated on : 21.08.2019.
Transcribed on : 21.08.2019.
Signed on : 21.08.2019.
-- 3 of 3 --