Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: JUDGMENT 1 C.C.NO.2264/PW/2018
MHMM190092672018
Received on : 20.08.2018
Registered on : 20.08.2018
Decided on : 24.02.2023
Duration : 04Ys. 06M. 04Ds.
Exh. : 15
IN THE COURT OF ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
22nd COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(JUDGMENT U/SEC. 355 OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE)
(a) The serial No. of the case; : C.C. No.2264/PW/2018
(b) The date of commission of
the offence;
: 09.08.2017
(c) The name of the informant
(if any);
: The State (Sahar Police Station in
C. R. No.243/2017).
(d) The name of the accused
person, parentage and
residence;
: Nagendiran Srinivasan
Age : 30 years,
R/at : 11/13 Ramalimgam Nagar
West, Bharathi Avenue,
PostWoraiyur, DistTrichy,
Tamil Nadu62003 .
e) The offence complained of
or proved ;
: U/Sec. 465, 468, 471 & 420 of
Indian Penal Code.
(f) The plea of the accused and
his examination (if any);
: Accused pleaded not guilty.
...2/
-- 1 of 6 --
JUDGMENT 2 C.C.NO.2264/PW/2018
(g) The final order; : Accused is acquitted.
(h) The date of such order; : 24.02.2023
APPEARANCE :
Ld. A.P.P. Mr. Khade for State.
Ld. Advocate Mr.Sanjay Tiwari for the accused
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 24.02.2023 )
1. The above named accused person stands charged for
having committed an offence punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471
& 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for the sake of brevity
hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.').
2. Facts germane to the prosecution case is abridged
thus :
That on 09.08.2017 at around 21.30 hrs. at Immigration
Arrival Wing, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport, Sahar,
Mumbai accused arrived at Mumbai airport from Toronto(Canada) by
flight No. AC046. That on inspection of his passport it was found that
he possessed fake passport in the name of Srinivasan Nagendiran and
also photograph on it was replaced by him. Further it was revealed that
accused went to Canada from Delhi Airport on the strength of said fake
passport. Further it was found that the arrival and departure stamps of
Chennai Airport on the passport were forged.
...3/
-- 2 of 6 --
JUDGMENT 3 C.C.NO.2264/PW/2018
3. Therefore, the informant lodged report in respect of the
aforesaid incident with Sahar police station. On the basis of report C.R.
No. 243/2017 was registered under sections 465, 468, 471 & 420
of IPC against the accused. Investigation of the case was carried out by
A.P.I. Shri. Gangavane. After investigation he found sufficient evidence
against the accused, hence forwarded chargesheet under supra
sections.
4. Charges were famed against accused on 09.11.2022. He
pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In view of above rival facts
following points arose for my determination and I record my findings
thereon with reasons thereof :
Sr. No. Points Findings
1] Does the prosecution prove that, on above
date, time and place accused procured
fake passport and was holding forged
Arrival/Departure stamps of Chennai
Airport in the said passport, with intent to
commit fraud and thereby committed an
offence punishable under Section 465 of
I.P.C ? In the negative.
2] Does the prosecution prove that, on
above date, time and place accused,
procured fake passport and forged
Arrival/ Departure stamps of Chennai
Airport, intending that it shall be used for
...4/
-- 3 of 6 --
JUDGMENT 4 C.C.NO.2264/PW/2018
the purpose of cheating, and thereby
committed an offence punishable under
section 468 of the IPC? In the negative.
3] Does the prosecution prove that, on above
date, time and place accused fraudulently
or dishonestly used as genuine passport
and Arrival/Departure stamps of Chennai
Airport which he knew at the time when
used it to be a forged passport and stamps
and thereby committed an offence
punishable under section 471 of the IPC? In the negative.
4] Does the prosecution prove that, on above
date, time and place, accused
intentionally cheated Immigration
Authority by affixing forged
Arrival/Departure stamps of Chennai
Airport on his passport and travelled from
Toronto to Mumbai and thereby
committed an offence punishable under
Section 420 of the IPC? In the negative.
5] What order ? As per final order.
R E A S O N S
5. Prosecution in the instant case has examined only one
...5/
-- 4 of 6 --
JUDGMENT 5 C.C.NO.2264/PW/2018
witnesses, whereas the defence did not examine any witness in support
of his defence. Prosecution examined Investigating Officer as PW No.1
vide Exh6. Heard both sides.
AS TO POINT Nos.1 to 4 :
6. It has come in the evidence of I.O. that the accused
travelled to Mumbai from Toronto on forged passport. That he
corresponded with RPO, Triurchirappalli, as such to FRRO, Chennai for
verification of departure and arrival stamps and to Commissioner of
police, Trichi and he received reply from Tiruchirappali. Further it is
contented that the alleged offence seems to be committed at Toronto
and he had not sought permission as per Section 188 of Cr.P.C.
7. In the crossexamination it was admitted by the I.O. that
accused went abroad on genuine passport. Further it is admitted that
there is no report on record of Joint Director of Airport regarding arrival
& departure stamps whether it is genuine or forged. Further it is
admitted that verification of passport pages and its stitching was done
by Government press, Nashik, but he had not obtained any such report
from Nashik press. Further it is admitted that Exh13 i.e. reply of RPO,
Tiruchirapalli doesn't disclose the fact that the passport is forged. From
the evidence it is clear that only Investigating Officer has been
examined by the prosecution. In his evidence it has come that there is
no report on record regarding verification of passport pages and its
stitching. Any sort of tampering with the passport could be dealt
effectively under Passport Act subject to permission from Competent
Authority. In the present case, no charges levelled against accused has
...6/
-- 5 of 6 --
JUDGMENT 6 C.C.NO.2264/PW/2018
been proved by leading clinching evidence. Hence, for want of evidence
I answer all the points in the negative.
AS TO POINT NO.5 :
8. Since the point Nos. 1 to 5 are determined in the
negative, I am of the opinion that, the prosecution has failed to
prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and the accused is liable to
be acquitted. Hence, the following order as under:
O R D E R
1. Accused Nagendiran Srinivasan Age : 30 years, r/at : 11/13
Ramalimgam Nagar West, Bharathi Avenue, PostWoraiyur,
DistTrichy, Tamil Nadu62003 is hereby acquitted vide
Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under
Sections 465, 468, 471 & 420 of I.P.C.
2. The earlier P.R. bond of accused stands cancelled.
3. The accused to furnish P.R. of Rs.5,000/ in compliance to
section 437(A) of Cr.P.C.
4. The seized property, i.e. one Indian passport be returned to the
accused, after appeal period is over.
(Judgment dictated on dais and pronounced in open court).
Date.: 24022023
(J. W. Gaikwad)
Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate
22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai
csj
Typed on : 24.02.2023
Signed on : 27.02.2023
.../
-- 6 of 6 --