Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 Judgment in C. C. No.1221/PW/2018
Filed on .. 03.05.2018
Registered on .. 03.05.2018
Delivered on .. 10.01.2025
Duration .. 06Y 08M 07D
CNR No. MHMM-1900-5197-2018
Exh. 8
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.1221/PW/2018
(b) The date of commission of
offence;
On 19.07.2017
(c) The name of the informant,
if any;
: Through PSO Vile Parle Police
Station (CR No.239/2017)
(d) The name of the accused
person, his parentage and
residence;
: Suhas Manohar Tarkar – 54 yrs
Occupation : Service
R/o.: Kadamwadi, Vakola,
Santacruz, Mumbai
(e) The offence complained of
or proved;
: U/Sec.354(D), 509 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; : 10.01.2025
Appearance : Ld. APP. Samrat Patil for the State
Ld. Adv. Ghag for the accused
-- 1 of 5 --
2 Judgment in C. C. No.1221/PW/2018
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 10.01.2025)
1. Accused has been charge-sheeted for the offences
punishable U/Sec.354(D),509 of the Indian Penal Code (for short
“IPC”).
The prosecution case in short is as follows :-
On 19.07.2017 from 9.30 am till 9.40 am at Parle Subway
near to Airport, Western Express Highway, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai,
accused viz. Suhas Tarkar has perused the informant viz. Rupali Sachin
Kamble while she was travelling in BEST BUS ROUTE No. 181 in
between Vakola Masjid BEST Bus Stop to Parla Subway without her
wish and intentionally touched her head and hand. Due to such act of
accused, the informant felt ashamed. Thereafter, accused abused the
informant in filthy words. Therefore, informant lodged complaint
against the accused at Vile Parle Police station. On the basis of
complaint, the Vile Parle Police station has registered an offence bearing
Crime No.239/2017 for the offence punishable under section 354(D),
509 of IPC. During the investigation, the Investigating Officer has
recorded statement of witnesses, prepared spot panchanama.After
completion of investigation, the investigating officer has submitted
charge-sheet against the accused.
2. I have framed charge against the accused vide Exh.2 on dtd.
20.01.2020 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.
-- 2 of 5 --
3 Judgment in C. C. No.1221/PW/2018
3. Since there is 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 Does the prosecution prove that the accused on
19.07.2017 from 9.30 am till 9.40 am at Parle
Subway near to Airport, Western Express
Highway, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai tried to
follow and contacted the informant viz. Rupali
Sachin Kamble without her wish ?
...Not
proved
2 Does prosecution prove that on the above date,
time & place, accused intending to insult the
modesty of informant by doing obscene
gestures intending that same shall be seen by
her ?
...Not
proved
3 What order ? Accused is
acquitted
R E A S O N S
As to points No. 1 to 3 :
5. In order to prove guilt of the accused, the prosecution has
examined only one witness i.e. P.W. No. 1 Rupali Sachin Kamble at
Exh.4. Thereafter, the prosecution has filed evidence closed pursis at
Exh.7, therefore, evidence of prosecution closed by passing order below
Exh.1.
-- 3 of 5 --
4 Judgment in C. C. No.1221/PW/2018
6. P.W. No.1 informant Rupali Sachin Kamble in her
examination-in-chief has stated that, on 19.07.2017 she had lodged the
complaint against the accused Suhas at Vile Parle Police Station in a fit
of anger. The FIR is Exh.5. As the witness not supported the prosecution
case, therefore, the Ld. A.P.P. sought the permission to cross-examine
her. During the cross-examination conducted by Ld. APP, she admitted
that, the matter has been settled with the accused out of the court and
now there is no dispute between her and accused and she doesn’t want
to proceed with this matter.
7. It is pertinent to note that, the informant is not supporting to
the prosecution, hence, 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. 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 points
No.1 and 2 are in the negative and for answering point No.3, I pass
following order :-
ORDER
1) Accused viz. Suhas Manohar Tarkar is acquitted vide
Section 248(1) of the Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable
U/Sec.354(D), 509 of the Indian Penal Code.
2) Bail bond of accused stands cancelled.
-- 4 of 5 --
5 Judgment in C. C. No.1221/PW/2018
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) Judgment dictated & declared in an open Court.
Date. 10.01.2025 (Hashmi H.A.H.I.)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
65th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
ask
Dictated &
typed on : 10.01.2025
Signed on : 10.01.2025
-- 5 of 5 --