Final Order 2

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: JUDGMENT 1 C.C.NO.1190/PW/2018
MHMM190060072018
Received on :- 27.04.2018
Registered on :- 06.06.2018
Decided on :- 17.06.2026
Duration :- 8 Ys. 1 M. 20 Ds.
Exh. :- 10
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
(Presided over by : U. L. Pathak, Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Court No.22, Andheri, Mumbai)
Decided on :- 17/06/2026
Criminal Case No. 1190/PW/2018
CNR No.MHMM19-006007-2018
FIR No.
Police Station
170/2017
Sahar Police Station
COMPLAINANT State of Maharashtra
Through :-
Sahar Police Station
REPRESENTED
BY
A.P.P. Mr. K. S. Jamdhade, for the State.
ACCUSED
1)
2)
Uban Domnic D’Souza
Age - 56 years, Occupation - Nil,
Prapechual Uban D’Souza
Age – 48 years, Occupation – Nil,
-- 1 of 7 --
JUDGMENT 2 C.C.NO.1190/PW/2018
Both accused
R/o. : 32/A John D’Souza House,
Road – 2, Sahar Gaon,
Andheri (E), Mumbai.
Date of Offence 09/06/2017
Date of Complaint 10/06/2017
Date of Charge-sheet 27/04/2018
Date of Framing of Charge 20/12/2018
Date of commencement of evidence 16/03/2026
Date on which case reserved for Judgment 17/06/2026
Date of the Judgment 17/06/2026
Date of the Sentencing Order, if any 17/06/2026
Details of Accused
Rank of
accused
Name
of
accused
Date of
Arrest
Date of
Release
on Bail
Offences
charged with
Whether
acquitted
or
convicted
Sentence
imposed
Period of
Detention
Undergone
during
Trial for
purpose of
Section
428, Cr.P.C.
1. Uban
Domnic
D’Souza
12/06/
2017
12/06/2
017
324, 504,
506, 354 r/w
34 of Indian
Penal Code
Acquitted - -
2. Prapech
ual
Uban
D’Souza
-do- -do- -do- -do- - -
Part 'C'
[Para 44(iii) of Chapter VI of Criminal Manual]
LIST OF PROSECUTION / DEFENCE / COURT WITNESSES
A. Prosecution :
RANK NAME NATURE OF EVIDENCE
-- 2 of 7 --
JUDGMENT 3 C.C.NO.1190/PW/2018
(EYE WITNESS, POLICE WITNESS,
EXPERT WITNESS, MEDICAL
WITNESS, PANCH WITNESS, OTHER
WITNESS)
PW1/Exh. 07 Twinkle Tamilaresan
Informant
B. Defence Witnesses, if any :
RANK NAME NATURE OF EVIDENCE
(EYE WITNESS, POLICE WITNESS,
EXPERT WITNESS, MEDICAL
WITNESS, PANCH WITNESS, OTHER
WITNESS)
- - -
C. Court Witnesses, if any :
RANK NAME NATURE OF EVIDENCE
(EYE WITNESS, POLICE WITNESS,
EXPERT WITNESS, MEDICAL
WITNESS, PANCH WITNESS, OTHER
WITNESS)
- - -
LIST OF PROSECUTION / DEFENCE / COURT EXHIBITS
A. Prosecution :
Sr. No. Exhibit Number Description
1. Exhibit-08 and 09
Signature on printed FIR
B. Defence :
Sr. No. Exhibit Number Description
- - -
C. Court Exhibits :
Sr. No. Exhibit Number Description
- - -
D. Material Objects :
Sr. No. Material Object Number
Description
- - -
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 17/06/2026)
1. The accused are charged for the offence punishable under
Sections 324 and 354 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for the sake of
-- 3 of 7 --
JUDGMENT 4 C.C.NO.1190/PW/2018
brevity hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.').
2. In short, it is the case of prosecution that the informant
Kum. Twinkle Tamilaresan was residing along with his family members
at Sahar Gaon, Andheri. She was also taking education in Divine Child
Junior College. The house in which she is residing was owned and in
possession of her grand mother Sandana Merry Mani. There was
property dispute in between the accused persons and his family. On
09/06/2017, the officers of the corporation had removed the upper
portion of our house branding them as unauthorized in their action at
about 2.00 p.m. In the evening at about 6.00 p.m. my grand mother
had been to the market to purchase vegetables at Road No.2. When I
went there, I observed there was some gathering of people on the
happening of certain event.
3. On making inquiry, I found that the accused were raised
quarrel with my grand mother Sandana Merry Mani and aunt Rita
Kumar on the ground of property dispute and they were also beating
them by means of iron rod. They were also abusing them in filthy
language and also threatened to dire consequences. At that time, my
maternal cousin Natasha had also come there and intervened in the
matter. Then, accused no.1 outraged the modesty of Natasha by
pressing chest. On that basis the informant lodged the report with the
police station Sahar.
4. On the basis of the report lodged by the informant Crime
No.170/2017 was registered with Sahar Police Station and work of
investigation was carried out by Rahul Shinde of Sahar police station.
-- 4 of 7 --
JUDGMENT 5 C.C.NO.1190/PW/2018
5. During investigation, the investigation officer visited the
spot of incident, prepared panchanamas, arrested the accused, recorded
the statements of witnesses and after completion of investigation the
charge sheet was filed for the offence punishable under section 324,
504, 506 and 354 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
6. The charge of the accused was recorded at Exh-2. They
pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the meanwhile, the case
was compounded to the extent of charge under section 504 and 506 of
the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution has led its evidence. As the
informant turned hostile and mater was also compounded, the evidence
of prosecution was closed. As there were no incriminating
circumstances came on record against the accused persons, their
statements under section 313 of Cr. P.C. were dispensed with.
7. The points arise for determination along with my finding
thereon are as under :-
Sr. No.
Points
Findings
1] Has the prosecution proved that the
accused in furtherance of their common
intention voluntarily caused hurt to the
informant by means of deadly weapon
i.e. iron rod and stone and thereby
committed an offence punishable under
section 324 r/w 34 of Indian Penal
Code?
No
-- 5 of 7 --
JUDGMENT 6 C.C.NO.1190/PW/2018
2] Has the prosecution proved that accused
no.1 assaulted or used criminal force to
intending to outrage the modesty of the
victim and thereby committed an offence
punishable under section 354 of the
Indian Penal Code?
No
3] What order ? The accused are
acquitted.
R E A S O N S
POINT NO. 1 & 2 :-
8. In order to prove the guilt of accused, the prosecution has
examined the informant - Twinkle Tamilaresan (PW 1) at Exh.07.
However, the informant completely turned hostile to the prosecution
stating that no such incident ever took place though the report (Exh.08)
and FIR (Exh.09) were lodged. Moreover, it is the matter of fact that
the case is compromised and compounded between the informant and
the accused persons. The accused were already acquitted for the offence
punishable under section 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code by
passing specific order dated 16/03/2026 below Exh.01.
9. As such, there is no evidence on record to bring home the
guilt of accused persons. Hence, I hold that the prosecution has failed
to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubts. Hence, I
answer Point No.1 and 2 in the negative.
-- 6 of 7 --
JUDGMENT 7 C.C.NO.1190/PW/2018
AS TO POINT NO.3:-
10. As the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of
accused beyond all reasonable doubts, they will have to be acquitted for
the offence punishable under section 324 and 354 r/w 34 of the Indian
Penal Code. Hence, in answer to Point No.3, I pass the following order:-
O R D E R
1. Accused no.1 and 2 are hereby acquitted of the offence
punishable under Sections 324 and 354 r/w 34 of Indian Penal
Code, vide Section 248(1) of The Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973.
2. The earlier bail bonds of accused persons stand cancelled.
3. The seized muddemal property i.e. one iron rod and one
stone be destroyed after appeal period is over.
4. The accused 1 and 2 to furnish P.R. of Rs.15,000/-
each in
compliance to section 437(A) of of The Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973.
5. The Judgment is dictated on dais and pronounced in open
Court.
Date.:- 17/06/2026
(U. L. PATHAK)
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate
22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai
-- 7 of 7 --