Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No. 1808/PS/2018
Filed on .. 22/06/2018
Registered on .. 22/06/2018
Delivered on .. 12/07/2023
Duration .. 05Y 00M 20D
CNR No.MHMM190067262018
Exh. 6
BEFORE 65th METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(Presided over by Hashmi H.A.H.I.)
(Judgment as per Sec. 355 of the Cr.P.C.)
1 The serial number of the
case
: C.C. No.1808/PS/2018
2 The date of commission of
offence
: On 18.12.2017 from 06.15 p.m.
to 06.35 p.m.
3 The name of the
informant, if any
: Through PSO Andheri Police
Station (CR.No.633/2017)
4 The name of the
accused,his parentage &
residence
: Shamsunder Yogendra
Kushwah
Age : 34 years
Occupation : Autorickshaw
driver
R/o. 106, Samrat Ashok
Nagar, Vileparle East,
Mumbai99
5 The offence complained of
or proved
: U/Sec.338, 504 & 506 of the
Indian Penal Code
6 The plea of the accused &
his examination, if any
: Accused pleaded not guilty
7 The final order : As per Final Order
8 The date of such order : 12/07/2023
-- 1 of 4 --
2 C. C. No. 1808/PS/2018
Appearance : Ld. APP. Samrat Patil for the State
Ld. Adv. Subhash Gaikwad for the accused
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 12/07/2023)
1. Following points arise for my determination and I have
recorded findings thereon for the reasons discussed herein after :
SR.NO. POINTS FINDINGS
1 Does the prosecution prove that on
18.12.2017 from 06.15 p.m. to 06.35
p.m., in front of Vijay Nagar Society,
Sahar road, Andheri East, Mumbai,
accused caused grievous hurt to the
informant namely Mohammad Islam
Sayyad by giving kick to him so rashly and
negligently so as to endanger human life
or personal safety of others ? Not
proved
2 Whether prosecution prove that on the
above date, time & place, accused
intentionally insulted informant by
abusing him and thereby gave
provocation, intending that such
provocation would cause him to break the
public peace ? Not
proved
-- 2 of 4 --
3 C. C. No. 1808/PS/2018
3 Whether prosecution prove that on the
above date, time & place, accused
threatened the informant with intent to
cause alarm to the same ? Not
proved
4 What order ? Accused is
acquitted
R E A S O N S
As to point No 1 to 3 :
2. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution
has examined only one witness i.e.Mohammad Islam Mohammad
Aslam as PW1 at Exh.4.
3. PW1 stated in his evidence that he was driving auto
rickshaw in the year 2017. There was quarrel took place between
him and accused on the ground of parking the autorickshaw.
Thereafter he lodged the police complaint in the police station.
4. During cross examination, he stated that compromise
took place with the accused and he does not want to proceed
further.
5. It appears from the evidence of prosecution (PW1) that
he has not supported to the prosecution case and the matter is
amicably settled between the parties, therefore, I come to the
conclusion that prosecution has not proved its case beyond
reasonable doubt against the accused for the offences which he has
-- 3 of 4 --
4 C. C. No. 1808/PS/2018
been charged. Hence, accused is entitled for acquittal. In the
result, in answer to points No.1 to 3 in the negative and for
answering point No.4, I pass following order :
ORDER
1) Accused is acquitted of the offence punishable U/Sec.338, 504
& 506 vide Section 255(1) of the Cr.P.C.
2) Bail bonds of accused stands cancelled.
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 which will be valid for next six month.
4) Judgment dictated & declared in an open Court.
Date : 12.07.2023 (Hashmi H.A.H.I.)
Metropolitan Magistrate
ask 65th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
Dictated &
typed on : 14.07.2023
Signed on : 14.07.2023
-- 4 of 4 --