Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 C.C.NO.2704/PW/2018
Received on : 01/10/2018
Registered on : 05/10/2018
Decided on : 06/06/2022
Duration : 03 Y.08 M. 05 D.
Exh. :
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. MHMM190100742018)
(a) The serial No. of the case; : C.C.NO.2704/PW/2018
(b) The date of commission of
the offence;
: 25/04/2018
(c) The name of the
complainant
(if any);
: The State (Amboli Police Station
in C. R. No. 218/2018).
(d) The name of the accused
persons and their
parentage and residence;
: 1) Raviraj Manohar Khedekar,
Age – 27 Yrs.
Occupation – Nil,
R/o. 307/7, Vaidunisa Chawl,
Kevanipada, S. V. Road,
Jogeshwari (W), Mumbai.
2) Yash Motiram Kondvilkar,
Age – 19 Yrs.
Occupation – Nil,
R/o. 307/6, Gajanan Chawl,
Kevanipada, S. V. Road,
Jogeshwari (W), Mumbai.
-- 1 of 6 --
2 C.C.NO.2704/PW/2018
3) Nelson Wilson Lucas,
Age – 28 Yrs.
Occupation – Nil,
R/o. 02, Ismail Chawl,
Kevanipada, S. V. Road,
Jogeshwari (W), Mumbai.
4) Manoj Jagannath Todankar,
Age – 50 Yrs.
Occupation – Nil,
R/o.05, Patil Chawl,
Yagnik Nagar, Kevanipada,
S. V. Road,
Jogeshwari (W), Mumbai.
(e) The offences complained of
or proved ;
: Under Sections 324, 323, 504
read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code.
(f) The plea of the accused
and their examination (if
any);
: The accused no.1 to 4 are pleaded
not guilty
(g) The final order; : The accused no.1 to 4 are
acquitted.
(h) The date of such order; : 06/06/2022
Mr. A. M. Shah, APP for the State.
Mr. Sujay Namey, Advocate for the accused.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 06th June, 2022)
1. The accused No.1 to 4 are prosecuted for the offence
punishable under Section 324, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
2. In brief, it is the case of the prosecution that on
-- 2 of 6 --
3 C.C.NO.2704/PW/2018
25/04/2018 after taking dinner he standing out in his house. At about
23.55 he came to know that at wood warehouse, S. V. Road, Jogehwari
(W), some boys had made quarrel with each other. Therefore, he went
there to see. He saw that Yash Kondvilkar, Raviraj Khedekar, Manoj
Todankar, Nelson Lucas are present in that quarrel. Therefore, he told
them for keep silent. Therefore, they abused informant and assaulted
him by hand. Accused Raviraj assaulted him by razer blade on his back.
Therefore, informant shouted. His friends Rahim Shaikh, Mazhar Khan,
Mosin, Harun Memon and Shaharukh came there and took him to
Copper Hospital for medical treatment. Thereafter, he went to police
station and lodged report against the accused persons.
3. On the basis of the report given by the informant, crime no.
218/2018 came to be registered against the accused persons. During
investigation I.O. drawn spot panchanama in presence of panch
witnesses. He arrested the accused persons. During further
investigation I.O. recorded statement of witnesses. After completion of
investigation, I.O. filed chargesheet.
4. The charge is framed against the accused persons for the
above mentioned offence. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed
to be tried. The prosecution has examined only one witness. As no
incriminating evidence came on record in the evidence of the
prosecution, the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure came to be dispensed with.
5. The points for determination alongwith my findings
thereon as under :
-- 3 of 6 --
4 C.C.NO.2704/PW/2018
Sr.No. POINTS FINDINGS
1] Does the prosecution prove that you
accused no.1 voluntarily caused hurt to
the informant Imran Munwwar Shaikh by
means of Razer Blade on his back, which
is used as a weapon in commission of
offence is likely to cause death?
In the negative
2] Does the prosecution prove that you
accused no.1 to 4 in furtherance of their
common intention voluntarily caused
hurt to the informant by hand?
In the negative
3] Does the prosecution prove that you
accused no.1 to 4 in furtherance of
their common intention intentionally
insulted informant by abusing him and
thereby gave provocation to him
knowing it to be likely that such
provocation will cause informant to
break the public peace?
In the negative
4] What order ? All accused are
acquitted.
R E A S O N S
AS TO POINT NO. 1 TO 3 :
6. The informant Imran Munwwar Shaikh (P. W. 1) deposes
at Exh. P04 that p ior to 3 years there was many people gathered on
opposite side of the road of his house. When he went to see somebody
had assaulted him from back side. He filed complaint against the
accused persons as he saw them in that gathering. He know the
accused they are resident of his area. I had not stated to police that
accused assaulted him. As the witness is not supporting to the
prosecution case with permission of the Court the Ld. A.P.P. asked
leading question in which P.W.No.1, informant deposed in his cross
-- 4 of 6 --
5 C.C.NO.2704/PW/2018
examination that accused have assaulted him but there was
compromised with accused hence, he deposed false in this case.
7. I have gone through the record. Though sufficient
opportunity were given to the prosecution, they failed to examine other
witnesses including Pancha witnesses and Investigating Officer. The
case is more than 03 years old. No any incriminating evidence came on
record against the accused persons during evidence of the informant.
The prosecution failed to prove the charges levelled against the accused
persons. 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.
Therefore, the accused is liable to be acquitted. In the result, in answer
to Point No.4, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1 The accused no.1 Raviraj Manohar Khedekar, accused no.2
Yash Motiram Kondvilkar, accused no.3 Nelson Wilson Lucas
and accused no.4 Manoj Jagannath Todankar are acquitted of
the offence punishable under Sections 324, 323, 504 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 248 (1) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
2 Bail bond of the accused persons stands cancelled.
3 The accused No.1 to 4 to execute P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/
(Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) each 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
-- 5 of 6 --
6 C.C.NO.2704/PW/2018
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:06/06/2022 44 th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
spj
Typed on : 06.06.2022
Signed on : 06.06.2022
-- 6 of 6 --