Gujarat High Court
The State Of Gujarat vs Ashokji Khushalji Rana on 21 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 492 of 2007
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Sd/-
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
=============================================
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
ASHOKJI KHUSHALJI RANA & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MS DHWANI TRIPATHI, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR MAHESH BHAVSAR(1781) for the Opponents/Respondents No. 1,3
UNSERVED EXPIRED (R) for the Opponent/Respondent No. 2
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 21/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant - State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') against the judgment and the order dated 03.01.2007 in Special Atrocity Case No.28 of 2006 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocity), Mehsana (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Trial Court'), whereby, the Page 1 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents - accused from the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC') and Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Atrocity Act').
1.1. The respondents are hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' as they stood in the rank and file in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. As per the report submitted by the learned APP of Police Inspector Mr.P.D.Darji, Kheralu Police Station, the accused No.1 Ashokji Khushantji Rana has expired on 20.05.2017 and the accused No.2 Rajuji Hariji Rana has expired on 10.04.2010. The copies of the death certificates of both the accused Nos. 1 and 2 have been submitted along with the report of the Police Inspector, Kheralu Police Station and both the deaths have been registered, and hence, the appeal qua, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 stand abated.
Page 2 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined
3. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:
3.1. On 14.10.2005 at around 14:00hours, the accused had a fight with Maniben wife of Dungarbhai Bhikhbhai Parmar for standing in the line to take the money for the milk and they assaulted her and beat her on the right leg and abused her and hurled caste slurs at her. The accused had a stick with them at the time of the incident and assaulted her with the stick and the complainant Maniben wife of Dungarbhai Bhikhabhai Parmar filed the complaint before the Kheralu Police Station on 18.10.
2005, which was registered at Kheralu Police Station II-CR No.128 of 2025 under Sections 323,504 and 114 of the IPC, Section 135 of the B.P.Act and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocities Act. 3.2. After registration of the FIR, the investigation was carried out by the concerned Investigating Officer and after having sufficient material against the accused, the chargesheet came to be filed before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, after completion of the process under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C., the case was Page 3 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined committed to the Sessions Court, Mehsana and the same was registered as Special Atrocity Case No. 28 of 2006. 3.3. The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code. A charge was framed by the learned Trial Court at Exh.2 and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs.3 to 5 respectively, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record. The prosecution has examined 07 witnesses and has produced 12 documentary evidences in support of the case. 3.4. After the closing pursis was submitted by the learned APP at Exh.33, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code was recorded. After hearing the arguments of the learned APP and learned advocate for the accused and after perusing the documents on record, the learned Trial Court, by the impugned judgment and order, has acquitted the accused. Page 4 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law, evidence on record and principles of justice. The learned Trial Court has not properly appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence on record it its true spirit. The the learned Trial Court has erred in coming to conclusion that the learned Trial Court has failed to prove the case of the prosecution beyond the reasonable doubt. The learned Trial Court has erred in acquitting the accused through there are ample and cogent evidence to connect the accused with the crime and the offences registered against them. The learned Trial Court has also committed an error in arriving at the conclusion that though the complainant and the prosecution witnesses have fully supported the case of the prosecution and there are no material contradictions, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the accused. The impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is illegal, invalid, improper, perverse and bad Page 5 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined in law and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.
5. Heard learned APP Ms.Dhwani Tripathi for the appellant - State and learned advocate Mr.Mahesh Bhavsar for the accused. Perused the impugned judgment and order of acquittal and have re-appreciated the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case.
6. Learned APP Ms.Dhwani Tripathi for the appellant - State has taken this Court through the entire evidence produced by the prosecution and has vehemently argued that the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence properly and the prosecution has produced cogent evidence to prove the case and has successfully proved the case against the accused but the learned Trial Court has not considered the same and has acquitted the accused. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned Trial Court is contrary to law, evidence on record and principles of justice. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned Trial Court is based on inferences, not warranted by facts of the case and also on presumption, not permitted by law. Learned APP has urged this Court to quash and set aside the Page 6 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined impugned judgment and order of acquittal and to find the accused guilty for the said offence. Learned APP has urged this Court to allow the present appeal and impose maximum sentence on the accused.
7. Learned advocate Mr.Mahesh Bhavsar for the respondents - original accused has submitted that the learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence in true perspective and has not committed any error in acquitting the accused. Therefore, no interference of this Court is required in the impugned judgment and the order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court and has urged this Court to reject the appeal.
8. At the outset, before discussing the facts of the present case, it would be appropriate to refer to the observations of the Apex Court in the case of Chandrappa & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka reported in 2007 (4) SCC 415, the Apex Court has observed as under:
Recently, in Kallu Vs. State of M.P. (2006) 10 SCC 313 :
AIR 2006 SC 831, this Court stated; "While deciding an appeal against acquittal, the power of the Appellate Court is no less than the power Page 7 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined exercised while hearing appeals against conviction. In both types of appeals, the power exists to review the entire evidence. However, one significant difference is that an order of acquittal will not be interfered with, by an appellate court, where the judgment of the learned Trial Court is based on evidence and the view taken is reasonable and plausible. It will not reverse the decision of the learned Trial Court merely because a different view is possible. The appellate court will also bear in mind that there is a presumption of innocence in favour of the accused and the accused is entitled to get the benefit of any doubt. Further if it decides to interfere, it should assign reasons for differing with the decision of the learned Trial Court". (emphasis supplied) ........ From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge;] (1) An appellate Court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded;
(2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate Court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law; (3) Various expressions, such as, 'substantial and compelling reasons', 'good and sufficient grounds', 'very strong circumstances', 'distorted conclusions', 'glaring mistakes', etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of 'flourishes of language' to emphasize the reluctance of an appellate Court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the Court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.
(4) An appellate Court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is Page 8 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the learned Trial Court.
(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court.
9. It is a settled principle of law that in an appeal against acquittal, the Appellate Court is circumscribed by limitation that no interference has to be made in the order of acquittal unless after appreciation of the evidence produced before the learned Trial Court, it appears that there are some manifest illegality of perversity which could not have been possibly arrived at by the Court. It is also a settled principle that there is no embargo on the Appellate Court to review the evidence but, generally the order of acquittal shall not be interfered with as the presumption of innocence of the accused is further strengthened by the order of acquittal. The golden thread which runs through the web of administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case of the prosecution i.e.
(i) guilt of the accused and (ii) his innocence, the view, which is in favour of the accused, should be adopted, and if the learned Trial Page 9 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined Court has taken the view in favour of the accused, the Appellate Court should not disturb the findings of the acquittal. The Appellate Court can interfere with the judgment and order of acquittal only when there are compelling and substantial reasons and the order is clearly unreasonable and where the Appellate Court comes to conclusion that based on the evidence, the conviction is a must.
10. The prosecution has examined PW-1 Dr.Dilipbhai Nathabhai Bhatpuriya at Exh.7 and the witness was working as a Medical Officer. In the Community Health Center, Kheralu, on 18.10.2005. The witness has stated that on 18.10.2005 at around 12:30hours, Maniben Dungarbhai Parmar came with a police yadi for treatment and she had stated that she had received an injury on her right leg five days before. That she had taken treatment at a private doctor and she was assaulted with a stick on her right leg. The injury certificate is produced at Exh.8 and the witness has stated that on examination, he did not find any marks of injury or that the injured was beaten up with a stick and he did not give her any treatment. During the cross examination by the learned Page 10 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that there was no fracture in the x-ray and if a person had a fall, they would have such type of injury.
10.1. The prosecution has examined PW-2 Kanabhai Ramabhai at Exh.10 and the witness is the panch witness of the panchama of the place of offense which is produced at Exh.11. 10.2. The prosecution has examined PW-3, Hussainbhai Wali Mahammad at Exh.12 and PW-4 Rajuji Kantiji at Exh.13. Both of the witnesses are the panch witnesses of the arrest panchanama produced at Exh.26, whereby, all the accused were arrested. The witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and have been declared hostile and have been cross-examined at length by the learned APP, but nothing to support the case of the prosecution has come on record.
10.3. The prosecution has examined PW-5 Maniben Dungarlal at Exh.17 and the witness is the complainant, who has stated that on 14.10.2005 at around 14:00 hours, her son, Alpesh, had gone to the Milk Society to take his salary and was standing in Page 11 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined line for taking his salary, and at that time, the accused came and slapped him and pulled him out from the line and hurled caste abuses against him and asked him why was he standing in the line meant for the Darbars. Her son came crying home and she, her son and her husband went to the dairy to scold the accused, and at that time, they beat her with a stick on the leg and had a fight with her. As she shouted her son-in-law Iswarbhai came and released her and she wanted to go to the hospital and she was taken to Visnagar hospital. That after they returned, the elders of the village, Jivanbhai and Babubhai and others came and they had a compromise on a Stamp Paper of Rs.10/-. That on the 4 th day after the incident at around 8:00pm, the accused No.2 came to her house and once again hurled caste abuses against her, and hence, she filed the complaint, which is produced at Exh.18. The witness has also produced her Caste Certificate at Exh.19. During the cross- examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that when her son came home and she went to the Milk Society, there were a number of persons there and the employees of the Milk Society were also there. That she did not ask anyone Page 12 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined anything but started verbally assaulting them and the verbal assault went on for 20 to 25 minutes. That a number of persons had gathered there but she does not know their names. That she had sustained a fracture on her leg and she was taken to the hospital at Visnagar. That she and her son had demanded money from the accused for money for treatment after four days but the accused did not give her money, and hence, she called her son-in- law and Jivanbhai and they told her to file the complaint, and hence, she had filed the complaint. That the complaint was dictated by her son-in-law and Jivanbhai and she had merely affixed her signature. That she had received a check of Rs.2000/- from the Social Welfare Department.
10.4. The prosecution has examined PW-6 Alpeshkumar Dungarbhai Parmar at Exh.20 and the witness is the son of the complainant who has stated that on 14.10.2005, he had gone to the Milk Cooperative Society to take the money for the milk and when he was standing in the line, the accused No.1 came and he told the accused No.1 to stand behind in the line, but he pulled him out and hurled caste abuses and beat him with fists. That he went Page 13 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined home crying and told his parents and his brother and they all came to the Milk Society, and at that time, the accused got angry and hurled caste abuses against them and beat his mother with a stick on her leg. That his mother was taken to the Visnagar Hospital, and thereafter, they had a compromise with the accused on a Stamp Paper of Rs.10/-. On 17.10. 2005, the accused No.2 came and asked for the compromise paper, and once again, they had an altercation. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that when he was standing in the line, there were about 10 to 15 people in front of him, but he cannot name them. The employees of the Milk Society were present and he waited for 10 to 15 minutes. That he did not talk to any other person standing in the line or the employees of the Milk Society, and thereafter, he went home. That when his father and mother came back to the Milk Society, there were a number of persons standing there and the altercation between them took place for about 20 to 25 minutes.
10.5. The prosecution has examined PW-7 Balkrishna Girjashankar Trivedi at Exh.24 and the witness was working as a Page 14 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined writer in the Dy.S.P. office at the time of the incident and the investigation was undertaken by Dy.S.P. Pandor, who has expired. The witness has produced the documents on behalf of Dy.S.P. Pandor and the Compromise Deed, which was executed between the parties at Exh.27. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that during investigation, it was found that there was a fight about standing in the line and they had recorded the statements of the employees of the dairy and other persons who were standing in the line. That Alpeshkumar did not take any treatment and the further statement of Maniben was not recorded after her medical certificate was received.
11. On minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution, the incident as per the say of the complainant has occurred on 14.10.2005 and the complaint has been filed on 18.10.2005 after a delay of almost four days, but there is no explanation with regard to the delay in filing of the complaint. The complainant has stated that she was injured with a stick on her leg and she had sustained a fracture and she had gone to the hospital Page 15 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined at Visnagar for treatment, but PW-1 Dr.Dilipbhai Nathabhai Bhatpuriya examined at Exh.7 has categorically stated that the X- ray was taken and no fracture could be found on the leg of the complainant. The complainant has stated that she had taken treatment from a private doctor at Visnagar, but there is no evidence regarding this on record. Moreover, the complainant has stated that immediately after the incident, there was a compromise between them and a compromise deed was executed on a Stamp Paper of Rs.10/- and the same is produced at Exh.27, but on perusal of the document produced at Exh.27, the signature of the complainant is not on the same. As per the say of the complainant and her son PW-6 Alpeshkumar Dungarbhai Parmar there were a number of persons standing in the line and the employees of the milk society were also present, but none of the independent persons have been examined by the prosecution before the learned trial court. Moreover, the complainant has admitted that she has filed the complaint only after advice from her nephew and one Jinabhai, and they were in the police station with her and they had dictated the complaint and she had merely affixed her thumb Page 16 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined impression on the same. The caste certificate of the complainant is merely produced by the complainant at Exh.19, but no independent authority has been examined regarding the caste of the complainant. Admittedly two incidents had occurred on the date of the incident; one at the dairy and one at home on 17.10.2005, but there are no independent witnesses to any of the incidents. What has emerged on record is that the complainant and her son demanded money from the accused which was not given, and hence the complaint was filed, and all the evidence has been discussed by the learned Trial Court.
12. In view of the above, the learned Trial Court has appreciated the entire evidence in proper perspective and there does not appear to be any infirmity and illegality in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. The learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence and this Court is of the considered opinion that the learned Trial Court was completely justified in acquitting the accused of the charges leveled against them. The findings recorded by the learned Trial Court are absolutely just and proper and no illegality or infirmity has been committed by Page 17 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025 undefined the learned Trial Court and this Court is in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order and the present appeal is devoid of merits and resultantly, the same is dismissed.
13. The impugned judgment and the order dated 03.01.2007 in Special Atrocity Case No.28 of 2006 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocity), Mehsana is hereby confirmed.
14. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned learned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J) F.S.KAZI Page 18 of 18 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Wed Apr 23 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 23 21:54:57 IST 2025