Interim Order 4

Order Details: Copy of Evidence
Pdf Text: 1
C.C. No. 1747/PW/2018 Exh - 11
Deposition of Witness No. 6 for Prosecution.
I on solemn affirmation depose as under :
My Name : Kavita Aniket Naik
Age : 38 years Occupation : PSI
R/o. : Vishram Baug, Sangali, Dist - Sangali
Exam.-in-chief by APP Mr. K. S. Jamdhade for the State:-
1. On 05/05/2018, I was working as PSI in Sahar Police Station.
I had registered Crime No.145/2018. The informant Sweta Sharma had
lodged report alleging therein that the accused has outraged her modesty
by showing clip of her objectionable photos. Initially, the complaint was
registered by the informant online.
2. In that crime I personally investigated the same. I called the
accused and made inquiry with him with regard to the crime and also
arrested him. After his arrest I seized mobile of accused wherein the
objectionable clip of informant was there in presence of panch witness.
The panchanama is already marked at Exh.09. Now I cannot say through
with communication mode, the accused was called initially for the purpose
of inquiry. Thereafter, I sought information from the Air India in respect of
the incident by writing letter to it. The letter dated 07/05/2011 now
shown to me it the same. The contents are correct. It bears the signature
of senior PI Lata Shirsat. I know her signature as she has my senior
authority. It is marked at Exh.12. In response to the said letter, the Air
India has also supplied the information along with its letter dated
07/05/2011. The letter now shown to me. The contents are correct. It was
-- 1 of 4 --
2
address to the police station. It is marked at Exh.13. Thereafter, I
recorded the statements of eye witnesses of the incident. Thereafter, the
application was also made to the Bhoiwada Court No.7 for the purpose of
recording statement of informant under section 164 of Cr.P.C. The letter
dated 10/05/2018 now shown to me is the same. The contents are correct.
It bears my signature. It is market at Exh.14. Accordingly, the statement
of informant was recorded. It is at Exh.07.
3. After completion of investigation, there were sufficient
material against the accused to connect with the crime. Hence, the charge-
sheet was filed. I know accused. He is present before the Court today.
Examination-in-chief is completed
Cross-examination by Learned Counsel Shri M. H. Nizam for the accused:-
4. I do not remember whether the CCTV camera was lying in the
flight. True that I did not collect any CCTV footage from the flight. True
that I did not make panchanama going into the flight. I did not take
statement of independent passengers as the incident was not taken place in
presence of passenger. I do not know the seat numbers where the alleged
incident took place. It is not correct to say that the panch witnesses on
seizure panchanama were habitual. True that the independent video clip
or screen shot of the objectionable material were not attached in the
charge-sheet. The witness volunteers that the mobile was seized. I did not
collect log book entries containing the names of accused and informant
from the Air India. It is not correct to say that I prepared the charge-sheet
just sitting in the police station. It is not correct to say that no incident
was taken place that is why I did not collect the CCTV footage and log
-- 2 of 4 --
3
book from Air India. It is not correct to say that I have filed chare-sheet
under the pressure of my senior and without making proper investigation
into the matter.
Cross-examination is completed
No re-examination.
R.O.A.C.
(U. L. Pathak)
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
Date : 07.07.2026
Before me,
(U. L. Pathak)
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 3 of 4 --
4
C.C. No. 1747/PW/2018 Exh - 11
On S.A.
Further Exam.-in-chief by APP Mr. K. S. Jamdhade for the State As per
Order dated 24/08/2026 :-
5. During the investigation, I have recorded the statement of Atul
Govind Katarnavre (PW-02). The Portion marked ‘A’ in the said statement
of said witness now shown and read over to me. True that he has stated
such things in his statement. Hence, the portion mark ‘A’ exhibited as
Exh.16.
Further Cross-examination by Learned Counsel Shri M. H. Nizam for the
accused:-
6. It is not correct to say that the portion mark ‘A’ Exh.16 never
stated to me by the witness during the investigation.
Cross-examination is over.
No Re-examination.
R.O.A.C.
sd/-
(U. L. Pathak)
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
Date : 24/08/2026
Before me,
sd/-
(U. L. Pathak)
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 4 of 4 --