Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 C.C.NO.2716/PW/2018
Received on : 03/10/2018
Registered on : 03/10/2018
Decided on : 06/06/2022
Duration : 03 Y.08 M. 03 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. :MHMM190153662018 )
(a) The serial No. of the case; : C.C.NO.2716/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. 217/2018).
(d) The name of the accused
persons and their parentage
and residence;
: 1) Imran Monowar Shaikh,
Age – 23 Yrs.
Occupation – Nil,
R/o.Room No.3,Francis Chawl,
Kevani Pada, Jogeshwari (W),
Mumbai.
2) Mosin Nurul Khan,
Age – 33 Yrs.
Occupation – Nil,
R/o. Room No.06,
Kashibai Chawl, Kevani Pada,
S. V. Road, Jogeshwari (W),
Mumbai.
-- 1 of 6 --
2 C.C.NO.2716/PW/2018
3) Mazhar Harun Khan,
Age – 32 Yrs.
Occupation – Nil,
R/o. Room No.07,
Bela Almeg Chawl,
S. V. Road, Kevani Pada,
Jogeshwari (W), Mumbai.
4) Siraj @ Shahrukh Salim
Khan,
Age – 25 Yrs.
Occupation – Nil,
R/o. Sajid Tower 105, Amboli,
Kevani Pada, Jogeshwari (W),
Mumbai.
(e) The offences complained of
or proved ;
: Under Sections 509, 323, 504,
506 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.
Mrs. Harish Shetty Advocate for all accused.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 6th June, 2022)
1. The accused no.1 to 4 are prosecuted for the offence
punishable under Sections 509, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
-- 2 of 6 --
3 C.C.NO.2716/PW/2018
2. In brief, it is the case of the prosecution is that on dated
25/04/2018 after taking dinner informant is ready for sleeping. At that
time her neighbour Kavita calling her and told informant to see out of
the house what will happen. Therefore, informant came out of the
house and saw that on wood warehouse some boys are made quarrel
with each other. Her nephew Yash Kondvilkar went there for rescue the
quarrel. Therefore, accused Imran Khan had assaulted him by hand.
Informant came to know the said fact therefore she sent Yash to the
house. Thereafter, at about 23.45 hours accused Imran Khan, Mazhar
Khan, Mosin Khan and Shahrukh Khan came in front of her house and
asked whereabouts of Yash and abused and threatened the informant in
abusive words. Her son Raviraj call 100 number for police help.
Thereafter, police came to the spot. Thereafter, informant lodged
report with Police Station against the accused persons.
3. On the basis of the report given by the informant, crime no.
217/2018 came to be registered against the accused persons. During
investigation I.O. arrested the accused, prepared panchanama and
recorded statement of witnesses. After completion of investigation, I.O.
filed chargesheet against the accused persons.
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 two witnesses in this
case. As there is no incriminating evidence against the accused persons
in the evidence of prosecution witnesses, statement of the accused
under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is dispensed with.
-- 3 of 6 --
4 C.C.NO.2716/PW/2018
5. The points for determination alongwith my findings
thereon as under :
Sr.
No. POINTS FINDINGS
1] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused no.3 intending to insult the
modesty of informant, a woman
made gestures intending that same
shall be seen by the informant?
In the negative
2] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused no.1 voluntarily caused hurt
to the nephew of informant by hand? In the negative
3] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused no.1 to 4 in furtherance of
their common intention intentionally
insulted the informant by abusing her
and thereby gave provocation to her
knowing it to be likely that such
provocation will cause informant to
break the public peace?
In the negative
4] Does the prosecution prove that the
accused no.1 to 4 in furtherance of
their common intentioncommitted
criminal intimidation by threatening
the informant with injury to her
person with intent to cause her to do
which she was not legally bound to
do ?
In the negative
5] What order? All accused are acquitted
R E A S O N S
AS TO POINT NO. 1 TO 4:
6. The informant Sanjeevani Manohar Khedekar (P. W. 1)
deposes at Exh.04 that incident occurred prior to 3 years in front of
-- 4 of 6 --
5 C.C.NO.2716/PW/2018
road, near her house. There was quarrel. She heard noise. She went
to police station. Police had taken her signature. It is not happened that
she lodged the complaint against the accused persons as they are
abused her and assaulted her nephew.
7. Yash Motiram Kondvilkar (P.W.2) deposes at Exh.5 but he
didn't support to the prosectuion case. He stated that he had not seen
who has assaulted him.
8. I have gone through the record. There is no any
incriminating evidence came on record against the accused persons
during evidence of the informant and witness. The prosecution failed
to prove the charges levelled against the accused. Hence, I answer
Point Nos. 1 to 4 in the negative.
AS TO POINT NO.5:
9. 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.5, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1 The accused no.1 Imran Monowar Shaikh, accused no.2
Mosin Nurul Khan, accused no.3 Mazhar Harun Khan and
accused no.4 Siraj @ Shahrukh Salim Khan are acquitted of
the offence punishable under Sections 509, 323, 504, 506 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 stands cancelled.
-- 5 of 6 --
6 C.C.NO.2716/PW/2018
3 The accused 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 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 --