Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. NO. 3233/PW/2018
(Judgment)
MHMM190128312018
Received on :- 03/12/2018
Registered on :- 03/12/2018,
Decided on :- 09/05/2025,
Duration :- 06 Y. 05 M. 06 D.
Exh. :-
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS,
RAILWAY COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY NILESH V. BANSAL)
(a) The serial No. of the case; : 3233/PW/2018
(b) The date of commission of
the offence;
: 13/10/2018
(c) The name of the complainant
(if any);
: The State (Andheri Railway Police
Station in C. R. No.1875/2018).
d) The name of the accused
persons and their parentage
and residence;
: 1. Manoj Jyotishchandra Shah,
Age : 44 Yrs., Occ : Business,
R/o : Room No. 03, Rakha Sing
Chawl, Konkani Pada, Near
Narmada Hall, Kurar Village,
Mumbai 400 097.
2. Pintu Naresh Dillor,
Age : 32 Yrs., Occ : Business,
R/o : ground Floor, Vardhraj
Nagar, Kokani Agar, Antop-Hill,
Mumbai 400 037.
-- 1 of 8 --
2 C. C. NO. 3233/PW/2018
(Judgment)
(e) The offence complained of
or proved ;
: Under Section 392 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; : 09/05/2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Kishore Shinde, APP for the State.
Mr. D. D. Kerkar, Advocate for the accused.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 09/05/2025)
1. The accused are prosecuted for the offences punishable under
Section 392 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Case of prosecution in short is as under :
Informal Rohit Vishwakarma has given F.I.R. at police station
Andheri Railway that on 13/10/2018, his father is having business of
Aluminium Slide Window and he used to help his father in his business.
On 13/10/2018 as usual he by local train has travelled from Kandivali to
Andheri. When he was leaving the train at Andheri Station he has a
sensation that someone is putting his hand in his pocket therefore, he turn
around and found one person was stealing his mobile. That person was
accompanied by another and they have snatched his mobile and ran away.
When he raised an alarm RPF constable present on the platform has
caught him.
-- 2 of 8 --
3 C. C. NO. 3233/PW/2018
(Judgment)
3. RPF constable have taken both the accused to RPF office and
then to GRP Police Station Andheri Railway Station. Police escort two
panchas and prepared panchanama of seizure of the mobile from the
possession of accused no. 2 Pintu. He has confessed before police that
accused no. 1 Manoj has to snatched the mobile and has given in his
custody. On interrogating accused no. 1 he has confessed the offence.
Informant has identified his mobile which is of Vivo Company Y55S model
having Docomo SIM Card and JIO SIM Card worth of Rs. 12,500/-. As
accused have forcefully taken out the mobile from the custody of accused
present F.I.R. is filed.
4. F.I.R. came to be registered as Crime No. 1875 of 2018 for the
above-said offence at police station Andheri Railway. Investigating officer
API A. D. Mane has carried investigation, prepared seizure punchnama in
presence of panchas, recorded statement of informant and witnesses - RPF
Constable and as there was sufficient evidence agianst the the accused, he
is forwarded charge-sheet against accused before the Court.
5. Charge came to be framed against the accused for the offence
punishable under Section 392 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The
prosecution has examined six witness. The statement of accused under
Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure came to be recorded at, in
which they denied the allegation.
-- 3 of 8 --
4 C. C. NO. 3233/PW/2018
(Judgment)
6. 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, committed theft of mobile
handset of Vivo company of the
informant viz., Rohit Vishwakarma and in
committing theft voluntarily caused fear
of instant hurt to the informant ?
No
2] What order ? The accused are
acquitted.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NO.1 :-
7. Prosecution has examined informant Rohit Vishwakarma
(P.W.1) at Exh. P-04. He deposes that when train reached Andheri Station,
someone has taken out his mobile from his pocket, but he was not
knowing who has stolen his mobile. He has tried to call on mobile
initially, but it was switched off. After an hour it was pick-up by some
police official, they have informed him to come at police station and give
F.I.R. In cross-examination of Rohit (P. W. 1) denied that he has chased the
accused and they were caught red-handed. He has denied that he was
present when accused were taken at police station.
-- 4 of 8 --
5 C. C. NO. 3233/PW/2018
(Judgment)
8. Prosecution has examined Shamsu Sayyed (P. W. 2) at Exh. P-
05. He deposes that Police has called him at Andheri GRP police station
on 13/10/2018 and intimated that accused has committed theft and made
him to sign the panchanama. He clarified that Police is not taken any
search of accused in his presence nor has seized anything from the
possession of accused in his presence.
9. Prosecution has examined RPF constable Aniruddh Giri
(P.W.3) and RPF constable Ankitkumar Singh (P.W.4). They have
supported the case of prosecution and deposes that on 13/10/2018 at
about 10:30 a.m. they were on duty at Andheri Station platform no. 5,
where Churchgate fast train has just arrived and they heard noise of ‘Chor
Chor’ therefore, they rush toward the spot and find two persons were
running they caught them. Those person were having mobile of
informant, they have taken the accused at GRP police station. They have
not deposed before the Court that informant was present at the time when
the accused was caught neither this fact was clarified in cross-
examination.
10. Prosecution has examined Hawaldar Kailash Shahane (P.W.6)
at Exh.P-11. He deposes that on 13/10/2018 he was posted as Head
Constable at Andheri GRP Police Station. He taken down the contents of
F.I.R. as per submission of informant. Andheri RPF has brought the
accused at police station and they have took stolen mobile of informant.
Further investigation of the crime was done by API Ashok Mane.
11. Prosecution has examined Investigating Officer API Ashok
Mane (P. W. 5) at Exh. P-08. He deposes that Andheri RPF have detained
-- 5 of 8 --
6 C. C. NO. 3233/PW/2018
(Judgment)
to accused and has produced them at GRP police chowki at about 12.00
noon on 13/10/2018. RPF has also called informant whose mobile was
stolen by accused. He called panchas, taken search of a person and found
a stolen mobile of informant with the accused. He has seized the same by
preparation of panchanama (Exh.P-09). He has recorded statements of
RPF constable and as there was evidence he has forwarded charge-sheet
against accused before the Court.
12. As per evidence of informant Rohit Vishwakarma (P. W. 1) he
has tried to call on his mobile initially and it was switched off. After an
hour some Police Officers have picked it up and it was inform to come at
police station. Police Havaldar Kailash Shahane (P. W. 6) deposes that RPF
Andheri has brought accused and informant at police station and he has
recorded F.I.R. (Exh. P-12). RPF constable Aniruddh Giri (P. W. 3) and
Ankitkumar Singh (P. W. 4) have never stated before the Court that
informant was present when they have caught the accused. Andheri
Railway Station is completely covered under CCTV surveillance still the
best evidence is retained by the prosecution and is not produced before
the Court.
13. Informant says that he was not present when the accused was
caught and shown his inability to identify the accused. RPF constable who
have got the accused never deposed that informat was present when they
have caught the accused. Informant submit that initially his mobile was
switched off and after an hour some Police Officer has received the call
and has called him at Andheri police station. This conduct of informant is
very normal. Moreover, RPF constable Aniruddh Giri (P. W. 3) and
Ankitkumar Singh (P. W. 4) have never stated that informant was present
-- 6 of 8 --
7 C. C. NO. 3233/PW/2018
(Judgment)
when they have caught the accused.
14. Evidence given by GRP police Andheri is completely different
than the evidence of RPF constable and informant. They come with the
submission that RPF has brought informant and accused at GRP chowki
and they have seized the stolen mobile from the custody of accused no. 2.
If mobile was firstly found by GRP police then there was no reason for RPF
to bring the accused before the GRP chowki. In present case submission of
informant is crystal clear that he received a call from police may might be
from RPF Andheri and has visited RPF chowki he has confirmed that
stolen mobile belongs to him and on requisition of RPF he went along-
with them at GRP chowki.
15. Aniruddh Giri (P. W. 3) and Ankitkumar Singh (P. W. 4) might
have seized the mobile from the custody of accused but case of
prosecution is completely different that mobile is seized at GRP chowki
from accused no. 2 in presence of panchwitness who have not supported
the case of prosecution. Evidence before the Court does not match with
the case put up by GRP Andheri, there is shadow of doubt in respect of
identification of accused. Therefore, benefit of same shall be given to
them. It is not proved beyond reasonable doubt that, accused in
furtherance of their common intention, committed theft of mobile handset
of the informant and in committing theft voluntarily caused fear of instant
hurt to the informant. Therefore, I conclude that, prosecution failed to
prove the charge leveled against the accused. As a result, I answer point
no. 1 in the negative.
-- 7 of 8 --
8 C. C. NO. 3233/PW/2018
(Judgment)
AS TO POINT NO. 2 :
16. The prosecution failed to prove guilt of the accused.
Therefore, the accused are entitled to be acquitted. Seized mobile handset
of Vivo company be returned to the informant. In the result, in answer to
point no. 2, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1 The accused are acquitted of the offence punishable under Section
392 read with Section 34 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 After appeal period, seized mobile handset be given to the informant.
4 The accused to execute P. R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- 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 appearance.
Place :- Mumbai.
Date :- 09/05/2025.
(Nilesh V. Bansal)
Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Railway Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 8 of 8 --