Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: Judgment 1 C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
C/S filed on : 27/11/2018
Registered on : 27/11/2018
Decided on : 12/05/2026
Duration : 07 Y 05 M 15 D
Exh. 16.
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (F.C.)
10TH COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY S.G.AGRAWAL)
C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
(C.R.No. 300/2018)
(C.N.R.No. MHMM19-015390-2018)
The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
D.N.Nagar Police Station, Mumbai. ……… Informant.
V/s.
1. Sajjak Rajjak Shaikh @ Bahaddur,
Age : 27 Yrs.
R/o. Behind Sagar City,
Sadabahar Mohalla, Andheri (W),
Mumbai.
2. Rajjak Sonu Shaikh @ Bangali Raju,
Age : 74 Yrs.
3. Khalil Karim Abdul Ansari,
Age : 26 Yrs.
A.No. 2 and 3 R/o. Sadabahar Mohalla,
Gilbert Hill Road, Andheri (W),
Mumbai. ………. Accused.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Ld. APP for State : Shri. Shaikh
-- 1 of 10 --
Judgment 2 C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
The Ld. Advocate for accused : Shri. Patel
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART-B
Date of Offence 29/06/2018
Date of FIR 29/06/2018
Date of Charge-sheet 27/11/2018
Date of Framing Charge 17/07/2023
Date of commencement of evidence 17/10/2023
Date of which Judgment is reserved 12/05/2026
Date of Judgment 12/05/2026
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 Sajjak Rajjak
Shaikh @
Bahaddur
30/06/2018 10/07/2018 S. 323,
324, 326,
504, 506
r/w 34 of
IPC
Acquitted ----- -----
2 Rajjak Sonu
Shaikh @
Bangali Raju
29/08/2018 29/08/2018 Acquitted ----- -----
3 Khalil Karim
Abdul Ansari
04/10/2018 08/10/2018 Acquitted ----- -----
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 12/05/2026)
-- 2 of 10 --
Judgment 3 C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
Accused are prosecuted for the offences punishable under
Sections 323, 324, 326, 504, 506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code.
Facts of the prosecution case in short are as under :
2. FIR No. 300/2018 was registered with police station
D.N.Nagar on the report of informant in respect of committing assault
as well as abused and given threats to him. He therefore, reported the
matter to the police station. PSI Vikas Patil had recorded the FIR,
recorded the statement of witnesses, collected injury reports and
prepared spot panchanama and after concluding investigation,
presented charge-sheeted before the Court.
3. On 17/07/2023 accused have pleaded innocence upon the
charge read over and explained to them and trial commenced.
Prosecution adduced evidence of informant Harun Amir Shaikh (PW1),
Anis Harun Shaikh (PW2) and IO API Vikas Patil (PW3). As there was
no incriminating circumstances against accused, their statement u/Sec.
313 of Cr.P.C. was dispensed with.
4. Heard the Ld. APP for the State and the Ld. Advocate for
accused. Perused the oral and documentary evidence brought on record.
5. On the basis of evidence of witness examined by the
prosecution and argument submitted by the Ld. APP for State, 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
-- 3 of 10 --
Judgment 4 C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
1] Does the prosecution prove that on
29/06/2018 at about 17.00 hours Near Sagar
City, Andheri (W), Mumbai, accused in
furtherance of their common intention
voluntarily caused hurt to the informant and
his son ?
No
2] Does the prosecution prove that on abovesaid
date, time and place accused in furtherance
of their common intention, voluntarily caused
hurt to the informant and his son by means of
wooden bamboo due to which they sustained
injury, used as weapon of offence, is likely to
cause death ?
No
3] Does the prosecution prove that on abovesaid
date, time and place accused in furtherance
of their common intention voluntarily caused
grievous hurt to the informant and his son by
means of wooden bamboo ?
No
4] Does the prosecution prove that on abovesaid
date, time and place accused in furtherance
of their common intention intentionally
insulted the informant and his son by abusing
them and thereby gave provocation to the
informant intending or knowing it to be likely
that such provocation will cause informant to
No
-- 4 of 10 --
Judgment 5 C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
break public peace ?
5] Does the prosecution prove that on abovesaid
date, time and place accused in furtherance
of their common intention committed
criminal intimidation by threatening to the
informant ?
No
6] What order ? Accused are
acquitted
REASONS
AS TO POINT NOs. 1 TO 5 :-
6. The prosecution must prove that on 29/06/2018 in the
evening at about 5.00 p.m. at Sagar City Andheri (W), the accused have
quarreled and abused informant’s son Anis and dealt a blow of wooden
bamboo on his head as well as dealt him with fist blows. The
prosecution also required to prove that on that date, time and place
accused have alarmed the informant with threats to kill and also
insulted him with filthy abuses and provoked him to commit breach of
peace. To prove the same the prosecution examined both informant and
his son. They were asked about the incident dated 29/06/2018. The
informant stated that on that day at about 12.00 in the noon there was
quarrel in between both his son and the accused. He further stated that
accused No. 1 Sajjak had dealt blow of wooden bamboo on the head of
Anis while accused No.2 Rajjak had dealt his son Anis with fist blows.
He further stated that therefore, he lodged report to local police station.
He was confronted with FIR and he identified it as the report lodged by
-- 5 of 10 --
Judgment 6 C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
him. He has not spelled any involvement of accused No.3 during his
testimony.
7. His son Anis was also inquired about incident 29/06/2018.
He has stated that nothing happened on that day. Neither he himself
and nor his father was injured on that day. He failed to give any
assertion to the questions of prosecution suggesting that on that day
they both were assaulted by accused.
8. The oral testimonies of informant Harun (PW1) and his son
Anis (PW2) runs contradictory. The informant is accusing both accused
Nos. 1 and 2 of committing assault on his son Anis by means of fist
blows and bamboo stick while Anis (PW2) who is the alleged victim has
refused to admit the same.
9. The prosecution has also examined the IO who has given
account of his investigation and stated that he seized bamboo stick from
the spot. Spot panchanama is admitted by defence (Exh.11). However,
the whole panchanama nowhere disclosed any incriminating material.
10. It is the matter of the record that the IO in pursuance to his
investigation has collected injury report of Anis (Exh.13 and 15) as well
as injury report of informant (Exh.14). The injury report Exh.13 dated
21/08/2018 shows that Anis had approached for medical examination
at 6.30 p.m. with history of assault by 4 persons by means of bamboo
stick. He was examined at about 5.30 p.m. Whereas the injury report
Exh.15 dated 12/07/2018 shows that Anis (PW2) was examined at
-- 6 of 10 --
Judgment 7 C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
about 9.30 p.m. but, the history of injury is not mentioned. The accused
has admitted these injury reports which shows that at 6.30 p.m. a fresh
CLW measuring 8 X 1 X 1 cm was found over his vertex originated
diagonally and blunt trauma over his abdomen and chest was seen.
Injury report Exh.15 shows that a CLW measuring 6 X 1 X 1 cm was
found on his scalp on his occipital region and there was undisplaced
fracture of parietal frontal bone on left side and SDH in right temporal
region. The injury report Exh.14 shows that Harun Shaikh was
examined at 6.12 p.m. and was found CLW measuring 1 X 0.5 X 0.5 cm
below his left eyebrow and contusion measuring 1 X 1 cm on left side of
his forehead. He has also given history of assault by four persons with
the help of bamboo stick.
11. The informant’s testimony do not disclose involvement of
four persons in the incident. He stated that only accused Nos. 1 and 2
were involved. He has specifically stated that he was neither assaulted
nor any injury was caused to him. His statement is thus contradicted by
medical certificate Exh.14 filed on record by the IO. Further, testimony
of Anis (PW2) is also contradicted by injury report Exh.13 and 15. Even
he has not supported the testimony of his father and the FIR.
Consequently, the testimony of informant do not inspire confidence
owing to the material contradiction.
12. Anis (PW2) was confronted with questions permissible in
cross-examination with the leave of the Court. However, he flatly
refused to admit that the accused Nos. 1 to 3 have given blow of
-- 7 of 10 --
Judgment 8 C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
wooden bamboo stick on his head and the accused Nos. 2 and 3 have
assaulted his father.
13. Though the spot panchanama shows recovery of bamboo
stick but, in absence of any cogent and convincing evidence of assault
by the accused to the informant and his son, mere recovery of bamboo
stick is not helpful to the prosecution. There are missing links in the
chain of circumstances. The oral testimonies recorded through
prosecution are absolutely contradictory and cannot be believed.
14. It is the matter of record that against informant and his son
Anis as well as other two accused persons, a counter FIR was registered
at the same time bearing C.R.No. 299/2018. The charge-sheet in the
said matter is registered as C.C.No. 2820/PW/2018 and is listed on
today’s criminal cause list of this Court.
15. The informant while under cross-examination by accused
has admitted that he has settled the matter with accused and therefore,
filed pursis Exh.7. Even Anis (PW2) has also admitted that he has
settled the matter with accused and therefore, filed pursis Exh.9. There
is no iota of evidence to show that accused has caused grievous hurt to
accused or simple hurt to informant Harun for which they are charged.
The testimony of Harun (PW1) is absolutely silent on the ingredients of
Section 504 and 506 of IPC. Consequently, none of the charges are
proved by the prosecution. As such the accused are entitled to be
acquitted. Therefore, I answer point Nos. 1 to 5 in the negative.
-- 8 of 10 --
Judgment 9 C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
AS TO POINT NO. 6 :
16. 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. 6, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1 Accused No. 1. Sajjak Rajjak Shaikh @ Bahaddur, accused No. 2.
Rajjak Sonu Shaikh @ Bangali Raju and accused No. 3. Khalil Karim
Abdul Ansari are acquitted of the offence punishable under Sections
323, 324, 326, 504, 506 r/w 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 Seized wooden bamboo being worthless be destroyed after
appeal period is over.
4 Each accused shall furnish bond of Rs.10,000/- under Section
437(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Mumbai.
Date :- 12/05/2026.
Dictated on : 12/05/2026.
Transcribed on : 12/05/2026.
Signed on : 12/05/2026.
(S.G.Agrawal)
Judicial Magistrate First Class,
10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 9 of 10 --
Judgment 10 C. C. No. 3165/PW/2018
PART-C
LIST OF PROSECUTION/ DEFENCE/ COURT WITNESSES
A. Prosecution :
RANK NAME NATURE OF EVIDENCE
PW1 Harun Amir Shaikh (Exh.5) Informant
PW2 Anis Harun Shaikh (Exh.8) Witness
PW3 Vikas Gulabrao Patil (Exh.10) 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.11 Spot panchanama
2 Exh.12 Portion mark A’ from statement of witness
3 Exh.13 to 15 Injury certificates
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 :- 12/05/2026. Judicial Magistrate First Class,
10th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 10 of 10 --