Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: Judgment 1 C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
C/S filed on : 28/11/2018
Registered on : 28/11/2018
Decided on : 04/05/2026
Duration : 07 Y 05 M 06 D
Exh. 13.
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (F.C.)
10TH COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY S.G.AGRAWAL)
C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
(C.R.No. 130/2018)
(C.N.R.No. MHMM19-012545-2018)
The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Jogeshwari Police Station, Mumbai. ……… Informant.
V/s.
1. Ismail Khwaja Hussain Shaikh,
Age : 32 Yrs.
2. Salauddin Ismail Balwar,
Age : 27 Yrs.
A.No. 1 and 2 R/o. Amina Nagar,
Meghwadi, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai.
3. Ganesh Govind Solanki,
Age : 28 Yrs.
R/o. C/209, Saraswati Krupa,
Bhayandar. ………. Accused.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Ld. APP for State : Shri. Shaikh
The Ld. Advocate for accused No.1 : Shri. J. Shetty.
The Ld. Advocate for accused No.2 & 3 : Smt. Hemani.
-- 1 of 10 --
Judgment 2 C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART-B
Date of Offence 06/09/2018
Date of FIR 06/09/2018
Date of Charge-sheet 28/11/2018
Date of Framing Charge 06/05/2023
Date of commencement of evidence 19/07/2023
Date of which Judgment is reserved 04/05/2026
Date of Judgment 04/05/2026
Date of the Sentencing Order, if any. ---
Accused Details
Sr.
No
.
Name of
Accused
Date of
Arrest
Date of
Release on
Bail
Offence
charged
with
Whether
acquitted
or
convicted
Sente
nce
Impos
ed
Period of
Detention
Undergon
e during
Trial for
purpose
of Section
428
Cr.P.C.
1 Ismail Khwaja
Hussain
Shaikh
06/09/2018 07/09/2018 S. 354-D,
509, 506
r/w 34 of
IPC
Acquitted ----- -----
2 Salauddin
Ismail Balwar
06/09/2018 07/09/2018 Acquitted ----- -----
3 Ganesh
Govind
Solanki
07/09/2018 08/09/2018 Acquitted ----- -----
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 04/05/2026)
Accused are prosecuted for the offences punishable under
-- 2 of 10 --
Judgment 3 C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
Sections 354-D, 509, 506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code.
Facts of the prosecution case in short are as under :
2. FIR No. 130/2018 was registered with police station
Jogeshwari on the report of informant in respect of stalking her, giving
threats and abused her in filthy language. She therefore, reported the
matter to the police station. PSI Swapnil Thakre had recorded the FIR
and investigated the crime wherein he recorded statement of witnesses,
arrested the accused and after concluding investigation, he presented
charge-sheeted before the Court.
3. On 06/05/2023 accused have pleaded innocence upon the
charge read over and explained to them and trial commenced.
Prosecution adduced evidence of three witnesses i.e. informant Ananya
Tushar Sawant (PW1), Tushar Anant Sawant (PW2) and IO API Swapnil
Ravindra Thakre (PW3). The statement of accused u/Sec.313 of Cr. P. C
is recorded at Exh.9 to Exh.11 wherein they had stuck to their defence
of total denial and false implication.
4. Heard the Ld. APP for the State and the Ld. Advocate for
accused. Perused the oral and documentary evidence brought on record.
Also gone through the written notes of arguments filed on behalf of the
Ld. Advocates for accused Nos. 1 to 3 (Exh.12 and 13). The prosecution
has conceded that there is no evidence against accused Ganesh Solanki.
However, he submitted that the informant has deposed against accused
Nos. 1 and 2. Her husband has also corroborated and the investigating
-- 3 of 10 --
Judgment 4 C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
officer has presented the charge-sheet. As against this the written notes
of arguments filed by each accused reflects that according to them the
ingredients of the offences to which accused are charged, are not made
out. It is also mentioned that the informant’s testimony contains several
improvements amounting to contradiction. Therefore, they prayed for
acquittal.
5. On the basis of evidence of witnesses examined by the
prosecution and arguments submitted by the Ld. Advocates for accused
Nos. 1 to 3, following points for determination arose for my
consideration. I have recorded my findings to them along with my
findings thereon as under :-
Sr.No. POINTS FINDINGS
1] Does the prosecution prove that from
06/09/2018 at 18.00 hours In front of I.Y.
College Bus Stop, Western Express Highway,
Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai, accused had
followed the informant despite her clear
indication of disinterest ?
No
2] Does the prosecution prove that on abovesaid
date, time and place accused intending to
insult the modesty of the informant a woman,
made obscene gestures and utters words as
mentioned in the complaint and intrudes
No
-- 4 of 10 --
Judgment 5 C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
upon the privacy of the informant
3] Does the prosecution prove that on abovesaid
date and time accused committed criminal
intimidation by threatening to the
informant ?
No
4] What order ? Accused are
acquitted
REASONS
AS TO POINT NOs. 1 TO 3 :-
6. The prosecution has examined the informant and her
husband as witnesses to the present case. Except them Tushar Sawant
and Kanta Shelke were also named in the witness list but, the
prosecution did not examine these witnesses. The informant is star
witness of the prosecution case while her husband Tushar is a hearsay
witness. Thus, the testimony of the informant is required to be
appreciated in order to see whether the prosecution has proved the guilt
of accused for the offences with which they are charged. Before
appreciating her testimony, the essential ingredients of the Penal
offences with which accused has been charged needs to be addressed.
7. The accused Nos. 1 to 3 have been charged u/Sec. 509 of
IPC for insulting the modesty of the informant by obscene words or
gestures. They have been further charged u/Sec. 354-D of IPC for
-- 5 of 10 --
Judgment 6 C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
following the informant to foster personal interaction repeatedly despite
her clear indication of disinterest. Additionally they have been charged
for criminally intimidating her u/Sec. 506 of IPC.
8. Her testimony on oath reflect that while she was driving
moped near Trauma Care Hospital bridge, the accused No.1 was driving
his auto-rickshaw on the same bridge and accused No.2 was sitting at
the passenger seat alongwith one other unknown person. Over the
bridge accused No.1 tried to overtake her two wheeler and while she
slow down the speed of her moped, the accused No.2 made obscene
gestures towards her. She has further stated that while they both have
crossed the bridge, she stopped the rickshaw near Ismail Yusuf Bus stop.
A quarrel took place between them. She tried to see the badge of
accused No.1. At that time the unknown person sitting at the passengers
seat ran away, while accused No.1 pulled her hand and she received
injury at her little finger. Thereafter, she dialed 100 number to call the
police but, the accused No.1 and 2 ran away with rickshaw. She had
snapped the photo of auto-rickshaw which she has given to police.
Thereafter, she went to Jogeshwari Police station and lodged FIR at
Exh.7.
9. On perusal of the testimony of the informant, it is crystal
clear that her testimony do not suggest that accused had not followed
her with intent to foster personal interaction with her. She has not
described the gesture of accused No.2 so as to draw inference whether
the same was obscene. Moreover, she has simply stated that while
-- 6 of 10 --
Judgment 7 C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
accused were trying to overtake her, she said accused that she will file
complaint against them and the accused have replied that she may file
the complaint. The words uttered by the accused nowhere lead to
inference that they have criminally intimidated her. Consequently, the
whole testimony of the informant do not disclose that the act or
omission of either accused No.1 or the accused No.2 amounts to
commission of an offence punishable under Indian Penal Code. Apart
from it, there are several improvements in her testimony which have
been proved through the mouth of the IO. Her statement that she
suffered injury at her little finger has come as an improvement in her
testimony. Said statement is not corroborated by the testimony of her
husband. Even there is no corroborative medical evidence on record.
Omission to mention the fact of injury/hurt caused to her by accused, is
a material contradiction in her testimony which makes her an unreliable
witness. The circumstances on record shows that FIR was registered out
of quarrel which happened due to the attempt of accused to overtake
her moped. For all these reasons, I record my finding to Point Nos. 1 to
3 in Negative.
AS TO POINT NO. 4 :
10. The prosecution failed to prove guilt of the accused.
Therefore, the accused are entitled to be acquitted. In the result, in
answer to point No.4, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1 Accused No. 1. Ismail Khwaja Hussain Shaikh, accused No. 2.
-- 7 of 10 --
Judgment 8 C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
Salauddin Ismail Balwar and accused No. 3. Ganesh Govind Solanki
are acquitted of the offence punishable under Sections 354-D, 509,
506 of the Indian Penal Code vide Section 248 (1) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
2 Bail bond of the accused stands cancelled and he be set at liberty.
3 Accused shall furnish bond of Rs.10,000/- each with one or
two sureties in like amount under Section 437(A) of the Code
of Criminal Procedure.
Mumbai.
Date :- 04/05/2026.
Dictated on : 04/05/2026.
Transcribed on : 04/05/2026.
Signed on : 04/05/2026.
(S.G.Agrawal)
Judicial Magistrate First Class,
10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 8 of 10 --
Judgment 9 C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
PART-C
LIST OF PROSECUTION/ DEFENCE/ COURT WITNESSES
A. Prosecution :
RANK NAME NATURE OF EVIDENCE
PW1 Ananya Tushar Sawant (Exh.6) Informant
PW2 Tushar Anant Sawant (Exh.7) Witness
PW3 API Swapnil Ravindra Thakre (Exh.8) Investigating Officer
B. Defence Witnesses, if any :
RANK NAME NATURE OF
EVIDENCE
-- NIL --
C. Court Witnesses, if any :
RANK NAME NATURE OF
EVIDENCE
-- NIL --
LIST OF PROSECUTION/DEFENCE/COURT EXHIBITS
A. Prosecution :
S.N Exh. No. Description
1 Exh.7 FIR
2 Exh.8 Statement u/Sec. 164 of Cr.P.C.
-- 9 of 10 --
Judgment 10 C. C. No. 3169/PW/2018
B. Defence :
Sr.No. Exh. No. Description
1 Nil Nil
C. Court Exhibits :
Sr.No. Exh. No. Description
1 Nil Nil
D. Material Objects :
Sr.No. Exh. No. Description
1 Nil Nil
Mumbai. (S.G.Agrawal)
Date :- 04/05/2026. Judicial Magistrate First Class,
10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 10 of 10 --