Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. NO. 2665/PW/2018
(Judgment)
MHMM190098282018
Received on : 27/09/2018,
Registered on : 27/09/2018,
Decided on : 09/05/2022,
Duration : 03 Y. 07 M. 12 D.
Exh. : 05
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
RAILWAY MOBILE COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY IMRAN R. MARCHIYA)
(JUDGMENT U/SEC. 355 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE)
(a) The serial No. of the case; : 2665/PW/2018
(b) The date of commission of
the offence;
: Inbetween 20/03/2012 to
06/03/2017
(c) The name of the complainant
(if any);
: The State (Oshiwara Police
Station in C. R. No. 79/2017)
(d) The name of the accused
persons and their parentage
and residence;
: 1. Rashid Sayeed Qureshi,
Age : 39 Yrs. Occ : Mutton Shop,
2. Mohammed Dilshad Saeed
Qureshi,
Age : 29 Yrs. Occ : Bank Work,
3. Shabina Mehmood Qureshi,
Age : 34 Yrs. Occ : Housewife,
-- 1 of 6 --
2 C. C. NO. 2665/PW/2018
(Judgment)
4. Reshma Asif Qureshi,
Age : 40 Yrs. Occ : Housewife,
5. Zaitulnisha Sayeed Qureshi,
Age : 60 Yrs. Occ : Housewife,
All accused r/o. Dyaneshwar
Chawl, Room No. 517, BMC
Colony, Anand Nagar,
Jogeshwari (West), Mumbai.
(e) The offences complained of
or proved ;
: Under Sections 498A, 323 and
504 read with Section 34 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 are acquitted.
(h) The date of such order; : 09/05/2022,
Mr. Shah, APP for the State.
Mr. D. D. Kerkar, Advocate for the accused.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 09/05/2022)
1. The accused are prosecuted for the offences punishable under
Sections 498A, 323 and 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
-- 2 of 6 --
3 C. C. NO. 2665/PW/2018
(Judgment)
2. In brief, it is the case of the prosecution that the informant
Anam Qureshi got married with accused no.1 on 20/03/2012 as per
Muslim Rituals at Lucknow (U.P.). Accused no.2 is brotherinlaw,
accused nos. 3 and 4 are sistersinlaw and accused no.5 is motherinlaw
of the informant. After marriage the informant came to Mumbai with the
accused. Thereafter the accused started to illtreat the informant. They
used to tease the informant for demand of Dowry articles. The accused
used to beat the informant and used to hurl abuses against her. In April
2013 when the informant was pregnant, accused no.5 drove the informant
out of the house. After two days the informant came back to her
matrimonial house. Thereafter also the accused used to harass the
informant. The accused used to ask the informant to bring money from
her parents. Accused no.1 also performed second marriage without the
consent of the informant. Lastly the informant lodged report against the
accused in police station Oshiwara.
3. On the basis of the report given by the informant, crime no.
79/2017 came to be registered against the accused. During investigation
I.O. arrested the accused and recorded statement of witnesses. After
completion of investigation, I.O. filed chargesheet against the accused.
4. I framed charge (Exh.2) against the accused for the above
said offences. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The
prosecution has examined the informant only. As no incriminating
evidence came on record against the accused, their statement under 313
of the Code of Criminal Procedure came to be dispensed with.
-- 3 of 6 --
4 C. C. NO. 2665/PW/2018
(Judgment)
5. The points for determination alongwith my findings thereon
as under :
POINTS FINDINGS
1] Does the prosecution prove that the accused
in furtherance of their common intention
subjected the informant to cruelty ?
No
2] Does the prosecution prove that the accused
in furtherance of their common intention,
voluntarily caused hurt to the informant ?
No
3] Does the prosecution prove that the accused
in furtherance of their common intention
intentionally insulted the informant ?
No
4] What order ? The accused
are acquitted.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NOS. 1 TO 3 :
6. The informant Anam Qureshi (P.W.1) deposes at Exh. P04
the she got married with accused no. 1 on 20/03/2012 at Lucknow.
Accused no. 2 is her brotherinlaw, accused nos. 3 and 4 are her sisterin
-- 4 of 6 --
5 C. C. NO. 2665/PW/2018
(Judgment)
laws and accused no. 5 is her motherinlaw. After marriage she came to
Jogeshwari (West), Mumbai at her matrimonial house for cohabitation.
Thereafter, dispute started to arose between her and the accused persons
on domestic issues. She had given report against the accused to police.
F.I.R. dt. 06/03/2017 bears her signature. She is not aware about it’s
contents. The informant did not support the case of prosecution. During
cross examination of learned A.P.P., the informant denied that after
marriage the accused started to illtreat her. She denied that the accused
used to tease her for dowry articles and their demand of money. She also
denied that accused no. 1 used to beat her. She also denied that all the
accused used to hurl abuses against her. During cross examination by
learned advocate of the accused, the informant stated that now the
dispute is settled between her and the accused and as per settlement they
have decided for separation. Due to compromise she does not want to
proceed with the case and she want to close the matter.
7. I have gone through the evidence of the informant. The
informant has not supported the case of the prosecution. The informant
and the accused have filed compromise pursis (Exh.3) on record. From
the record it is clear that due to compromise between the parties, the
informant has not stated against the accused. No incriminating evidence
came on record against the accused persons. The prosecution failed to
prove the charges levelled against the accused. Hence, I answer point
nos. 1 to 3 in the negative.
AS TO POINT NO. 4 :
8. The prosecution failed to prove guilt of the accused.
-- 5 of 6 --
6 C. C. NO. 2665/PW/2018
(Judgment)
Therefore, the accused are liable to be acquitted. In the result, in answer
to point no. 4, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1 The accused are acquitted of the offences punishable under
Sections 498A, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code vide
Section 248 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2 Bail bonds of the accused stands cancelled and they be set at
liberty.
3 The accused to execute P. R. Bond of Rs. 15,000/ each with one
solvent surety vide Section 437 – A of the Code of Criminal
Procedure for appearance before the higher court, if said court
issues notice to them for their appearance in the matter in which
present judgment is challenged, if any.
Place : Mumbai.
Date : 09/05/2022.
(Imran R. Marchiya)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Railway Mobile Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
Dictated On : 09/05/2022,
Transcribed On : 09/05/2022
Checked and Signed On : 09/05/2022,
-- 6 of 6 --