Order 1

Order Details: Order
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
44TH COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
C.C.No.2634/PW/2018
State of Maharashtra
(Through Amboli Police Station), ….Prosecution
V/s.
Vinay Shravankumar Agrawal, …. Accused
ORDER BELOW EXH. NO.03
The accused who is alleged to have committed the offence
punishable under section 354 and 420 of Indian Penal Code filed this
application for discharge under section 239 of Cr. P.C. on the ground
that the case was filed against him with ulterior motive and the
accusations has no probative value. According to the applicant/accused,
the material ingredients of the alleged offence are not made out and
this case came to be filed to abuse the process of law and to damage the
reputation of the accused. Hence, he prayed to discharge him from this
case.
2. On the other hand, the learned APP opposed the
application on the ground that the prima facie case is made out against
the accused and the alleged offence are serious and therefore, this
application is not tenable.
3. Having heard the learned advocates for both the sides, I
perused the record.
4. In the present case on hand, there is ample material
available on record to demonstrate the ingredients of section 354 of
-- 1 of 2 --
2
Indian Penal Code. Moreover, this application discloses that the
accused was in the direct contact of the informant and he spent lot of
money on her. Thus, having regard to the intimacy of the accused with
the informant and the allegations which are well founded, I am not
inclined to discharge the accused at this premature stage. In other
words, unless and until the informant is given a chance of being heard
and the prosecution is heard, I am not inclined to allow this application.
Hence, I pass the following order:
O R D E R
The application stands rejected.
Sd/
( Sujitkumar C. Tayde )
Date : 04.04.2024 Metropolitan Magistrate,
44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 2 of 2 --