Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: – 1 – C.C.NO.1722/PW/2018
Received on : 28/06/2018
Registered on : 28/06/2018
Decided on : 06/05/2023
Duration : 04 Y. 10 M. 08 D.
Exh. : 08
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
44th COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY A. I. SHAIKH)
(JUDGMENT U/SEC. 355 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
(CNR NO.:MHMM190068522018)
(a) The serial No. of the case; : 1722/PW/2018
(b) The date of commission of
the offence;
: 25/12/2017
(c) The name of the complainant
(if any);
: The State (Versova Police Station
in C. R. No. 475/2017)
(d) The name of the accused
persons and their parentage
and residence;
: Vikas Harishchandra Patil,
Age: 52 Yrs, Occu.: Driver,
R/o. Chandrakant House,
Bazargalli,
Versova Gaon,
Andheri (W), Mumbai.
(e) The offences complained of
or proved ;
: Under Sections 354, 354 (D),
509, 341, 506 of the Indian
Penal Code.
(f) The plea of the accused and
their examination (if any); : The accused pleaded not guilty
(g) The final order; : The accused is acquitted.
(h) The date of such order; : 06/05/2023
-- 1 of 6 --
– 2 – C.C.NO.1722/PW/2018
Ms. Seema Mokal, APP for the State.
Mr. D. D. Kerkar, Advocate for the accused.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 06/05/2023.)
1. The accused is prosecuted for the offence punishable under
Sections 354, 354 (D), 509, 341, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that, on 25/12/2017 at
about 19.00 informant going to release the water from 3rd floor. At that
time accused was sat in front of his house. He caught hold her left hand
and waist. She rescued herself in his possession. Accused also
threatened her. Thereafter, she went to her house. She narrated the
said fact to her neighbourer Priya Charan Desle. Thereafter, she lodged
report against the accused.
3. On the basis of the report given by the informant, crime no.
475/2017 came to be registered against the accused. During
investigation I.O. prepared panchanama of C.C.T.V. footage, arrested
the accused and after completion of investigation filed chargesheet.
4. The charge is framed against the accused for the above
mentioned offence. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be
tried. The prosecution has examined only two witnesses in this case.
As there is no incriminating evidence came on record against the
accused during the examination of the prosecution witnesses,
statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. is dispensed with.
-- 2 of 6 --
– 3 – C.C.NO.1722/PW/2018
5. The points for determination alongwith my findings
thereon as under :
POINTS FINDINGS
1] Does the prosecution prove that
accused used criminal force to
informant Leelabai Mohan Kudekar
by caught hold her hand, waist,
pulled her and touching her breast
with intent to outrage her modesty
by such criminal force?
In the negative
2] Does the prosecution prove that
accused follows and attempts to
contact and to foster personal
interaction repeatedly despite a
clear indication of disinterest with
informant?
In the negative
3] Does the prosecution prove that
accused intending to insult the
modesty of the informant uttered
obscene words by abusing her in
filthy and obscene language
intending that same shall be heard
by the informant?
In the negative
4] Does the prosecution prove that
accused wrongfully restrained the
informant? In the negative
5] Does the prosecution prove that
accused committed criminal
intimidation by threatening the
informant with intent to cause
alarm to her?
In the negative
6] What order ? The accused is acquitted
-- 3 of 6 --
– 4 – C.C.NO.1722/PW/2018
R E A S O N S
AS TO POINTS NO. 1 TO 5 :
6. These points are interconnected with each other, therefore,
they are taken up together for consideration and determination.
7. Leelabai Mohan Kudekar, informant, (PW01) deposes at
Exh.4 that incident occurred on 25.12.2017 at about 7.00 p.m. in her
house. She went down for water release. At that time accused was sat
in the first floor. When she came back accused pulled her from back.
Therefore, she started to abuse him. He also caught hold her breast.
She herself rescued from the accused. He also threatened her. She
called her neighbour Priya Desale for her help. She told her about the
incident. Hence, on the next day she lodged report against the accused.
8. During her crossexamination she stated that she know the
accused as he was doing the work of her rationing card. He denied that
there was friendly relation between her and accused. She further
denied that accused was help informant and her daughter for money.
She also denied that no any incident had happened.
9. Bharat Kashinath Ambole, (P.W.2) deposes at Exh.6 that
the incident had happened on 26.12.2017. Leelabai had called him.
She has his relative. She narrated about the incident to him. He can
not do anything as he was out of station. Next day he met to Leelabai
and took her to police station.
10. During his crossexamination he denied that he had not
seen the incident. He admitted that the informant is not his relative.
-- 4 of 6 --
– 5 – C.C.NO.1722/PW/2018
She is belonging to other cast. He further denied that the informant has
lodged false complaint against the accused as per his say.
11. I have carefully gone through the record. The prosecution
has examined only two witnesses i.e. (PW01) Leelabai Mohan
Kudekar, she denied that no any incident had happened. Bharat
Kashinath Ambole, (P.W.2), he is hearsay witness. There is no any
concrete and reliable evidence came on record against the accused
during evidence of witnesses. The prosecution failed to adduce any
further evidence to prove the case of prosecution. Hence, I hold that
the prosecution failed to prove guilt of the accused. Hence, I answer
points No.1 to 5 in the negative.
AS TO POINT NO.6:
12. The prosecution failed to prove guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt. Therefore, the accused is liable to be acquitted. In
the result, in answer to Point No.6, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1 The accused Vikas Harishchandra Patil is acquitted of the
offence punishable under Sections 354, 354 (D), 509, 341, 506
of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 248 (1) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
2 Bail bond of the accused stand cancelled.
3 The accused to execute P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/ (Rupees
Fifteen Thousand only) vide Section 437–A of the Code of
-- 5 of 6 --
– 6 – C.C.NO.1722/PW/2018
Criminal Procedure for appearance before the higher court, if
said court issues notice to him for his appearance in the matter
in which present judgment is challenged, if any.
The Judgment is transcribed directly on the computer and
pronounced in open Court.
Mumbai ( A. I. Shaikh )
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Date: 06/05/2023 44 th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
*spj
Typed on : 06/05/2023
Signed on :06/05/2023
-- 6 of 6 --