Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 C.C.No.2138/PW/2018
Received on : 09/08/2018
Registered on : 09/08/2018
Decided on : 13/07/2023
Duration : 04 Y. 11 M. 04 D.
Exh. : 08
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
44TH COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY SUJITKUMAR C. TAYDE)
(JUDGMENT U/SEC. 355 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
CNR NO.MHMM190078802018
(a) The serial No. of the case; : C.C.No.2138/PW/2018
(b) The date of commission of
the offence;
: 02/03/2018
(c) The name of the complainant
(if any);
: The State (Versova Police
Station in C. R. No. 99/2018).
(d) The name of the accused
person and his parentage and
residence;
: Sanjay Kisan Bamniya,
Age – 27 Yrs.
Occupation Nil,
R/o. Sagar Kutir Sangh,
Sat Bangala,
Andheri (W), Mumbai.
(e) The offence complained of
or proved ;
: Under Section 325 of the Indian
Penal Code.
(f) The plea of the accused and
his examination (if any);
: The accused pleaded not guilty.
(g) The final order; : The accused is acquitted.
Metropolitan Magistrate,
44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 1 of 6 --
2 C.C.No.2138/PW/2018
(h) The date of such order; : 13/07/2023
Learned APP for the StateMs. Seema Mokal.
Learned Advocate for the accused – Shri Suhas Ghag.
J U D G M E N T
( Delivered on 13/07/2023. )
The accused has been chargesheeted for the offence
punishable under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case of the prosecution in nutshell is as under :
2. The informant/complainant namely Vitthal Bajijrao
Shivekar had gone to Sagar Kutir, Versova Beach to celebrate Holi
Function on 02/03/2018 with his friends namely Manoj, Rafique and
Harish. On the vary day at about 19.30 p.m. , one Rajesh quarrel with
the friends of the informant. The informant tried to give him
understanding. Thereafter, brother of said Rajesh who is accused is the
present case on hand, rushed to the spot and he gave blow on nose of
the informant. Hence, the nose of the informant got fractured and the
informant fell down. The friends of the informant admitted him in the
Cooper Hospital. Thereafter, the informant lodged the report against
the accused in the police station Versova. His report was reduced into
writing and the offence punishable under Sections 325 of the Indian
Penal Code came to be registered against the accused vide crime
no.99/2018. Further investigation was conducted by the Police Sub
Metropolitan Magistrate,
44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 2 of 6 --
3 C.C.No.2138/PW/2018
Inspector Pravin Rakshe.
3. The investigating officer visited the spot of incident. He
recorded the statements of the witnesses. Having completed the
investigation, the chargesheet came to be filed against the accused
person under Section 173 of Cr. P.C. against the accused for having
committed the offence punishable under Sections 325 of the Indian
Penal Code.
4. Having secured the presence of the accused, all the
documents filed alongwith the chargesheet were supplied to the
accused under Section 207 of Cr. P.C.
5. The charge for the offence punishable under Section 325 of
the Indian Penal Code was read over to the accused. He did not plead
guilty. Hence, the trial was conducted.
6. In the back drop of the prosecution case and the evidence
placed on record, the following points are formulated for my
determination. I record my findings thereon in the light of the evidence
led by the prosecution.
POINTS FINDINGS
1] Does the prosecution prove that on
02/03/2018 at about 19.30 at Versova
Beach, Sagar Kutir, Andheri, Mumbai, the
accused caused grievous hurt to the
informant?
Disproved
Metropolitan Magistrate,
44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 3 of 6 --
4 C.C.No.2138/PW/2018
2] What order ? The accused is
acquitted as per
final order.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NO. 1 :
7. In order to bring home the guilt of the accused for the
offence punishable under section 325 of Indian Penal Code, prosecution
has to prove the following ingredients
i] The accused voluntarily caused hurt;
ii] Hurt was grievous within the meaning of Section 324 of IPC;
8. The prosecution has examined only the
informant/complainant in this matter in order to prove the guilt of the
accused. Thus, the entire edifice of the prosecution case rests upon the
testimony of the informant/complainant (P.W.1). So let us scan the
evidence placed on record.
9. The informant/complainant namely Vitthal deposed that
on the occasion of Holi he had gone to Sagar Kutir with his friend.
According to his evidence, on hearing commotion, he went to the spot.
He testified that some one pushed him and thereby he sustained injury
to his nose. Though this star witness admitted the fact that he lodged
report in the police station, yet he denied the contents thereof. Thus,
this witness did not support the prosecution. Moreover, he did not
depose a single word against the accused. Therefore, by obtaining the
permission from this Court, this witness was crossexamined. However,
no incriminating evidence was brought on record against the accused to
Metropolitan Magistrate,
44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 4 of 6 --
5 C.C.No.2138/PW/2018
fasten his liability towards the offence mentioned in the chargesheet.
Therefore, the testimony of the informant is not sufficient to prove the
guilt of the accused.
10. At the outset, it is pertinent to note here that the statement
of the accused under Section 313 of Cr. P.C. is dispensed with since
there is no incriminating evidence against the accused placed on record.
11. In fact, the informant/complainant (P.W.1) categorically
admitted the fact that the dispute between him and the accused has
been settled and he does want to proceed further with this matter. In
such circumstances, it can be inferred that the informant/complainant
did not support the prosecution to prove the charge levelled against the
accused.
12. In the present case on hand, the prosecution did not
examine eye witness i.e. friends of the informant. So also the
prosecution did not prove the spot of incident. There are material
contradiction and omission in the evidence adduced by the
informant/complainant. The prosecution did not examine the
investigating officer to remove such contradiction and omission.
Moreover, the prosecution did not examine the medical officer who
might have treated the informant, Thus, the evidence placed on record
falls short to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
In such circumstances, I have no hesitation to record my finding in
negative for point no. 1. In such circumstances, the accused is liable to
be acquitted of the offence punishable under section 325 of Indian
Metropolitan Magistrate,
44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 5 of 6 --
6 C.C.No.2138/PW/2018
Penal Code for want of sufficient evidence.
The logical corollary of my aforesaid findings leads me to
pass the following order:
ORDER
1] The accused Sanjay Kisan Bamniya is acquitted of the
offences punishable under Sections 325 of the Indian Penal
Code of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 248 (1) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
2] Bail bonds of the accused stand cancelled.
3] The accused is directed to execute P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/
(Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) each vide Section 437–A of
the Code of Criminal Procedure to appear before the higher
Court as and when such Court issues notice in respect of appeal
are petition filed against this judgment.
4] The Judgment is transcribed directly on the computer.
5] The Judgment is pronounced in open Court.
(Sujitkumar C. Tayde)
Date : 13.07.2023 Metropolitan Magistrate,
44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
spj
Typed On: 13.07.2023
Signed On: 13.07.2023
Metropolitan Magistrate,
44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 6 of 6 --