Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Chaudhari Vinodbhai Daljibhai on 25 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 544 of 2007
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
CHAUDHARI VINODBHAI DALJIBHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
BAILABLE WARRANT SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
MR PANKAJ S CHAUDHARY(3269) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No.
1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 25/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appeal is filed by the appellant State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocity), Mehsana (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Special Atrocity Case No. 42/2006 on 21.12.2006, whereby, the learned Page 1 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined Trial Court has acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 427, 504 506(2) and 114 of IPC and Section 3(1)(10) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short). 1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as "the accused" as they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:
2.1 On 01.06.2006 at about 07.00 pm, the complainant -
Hemantbhai Hargovanbhai Chauhan had gone to the paan shop of Narsibhai Ambaram Prajapati at village Mandali, Taluka Kheralu and at that time, the accused came to him and asked him why he was standing at the crossroads and why was he making fun of the girls. The complainant told them that he was not making fun of anyone and all the accused got angry and started abusing the complainant and his younger brother Bharatbhai and when Bharatbhai told them not to abuse, the accused no. 2 took a wooden bat and Page 2 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined hit the complainant on the left side of his head and the bat broke and a piece of the bat was struck on the left cheek of the complainant. The younger brother of the complainant Bharatbhai intervened and the accused no. 1 gave him a blow with a stick on his right shoulder and the accused no. 3 assaulted the complainant with fists and the clothes of Bharatbhai were torn and his spectacles were broken. The accused abused them and threatened to kill them and also hurled caste slurs and hence, the complainant filed the complaint on the same day at around 23.30 hours at the Kheralu Police Station under Sections 324, 323, 506(2), 427 and 114 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocities Act which was registered at Kheralu Police Station I - C.R. No. 69 of 2006.
2.2 The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and after completion of investigation, a charge- sheet came to be filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kheralu and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, Page 3 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Mehsana as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Special Atrocity Case No. 42/2006.
2.3 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 at Exh. 2 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs. 3, 4 and 5, wherein, the accused denied the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.
2.4 The prosecution produced the following evidence to bring home the charge against the accused.
ORAL EVIDENCE
Sr. No. PW Name of the witness Exh.
1 1 Dr. Jitendrakumar Gangaram Mina 7
2 2 Chauhan Hemantkumar 10
Hargovanbhai
3 3 Chauhan Bharatkumar 13
Hargovanbhai
Page 4 of 18
Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025
undefined
4 4 Virabhai Sendhabhai SEnma 14
5 5 Chaudhary Maheshkumar Naranbhai 16
6 6 Jayantibhai Mansangbhai 16
7 7 Mayanksinh Ajitsinh Chavda 18
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Sr. No. Particulars Exh.
1 Injury certificate of complainant 8
2 Injury certificate of Bharatbhai 9
3 Complaint 11
4 Caste certificate 12
5 Panchnama of place of offence 15
6 Depute Order 19
7 Yadi 20
8 Panchnama of weapons 21
2.5 After the learned APP filed the closing pursis, the
further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. The accused refused to step into the witness box or examine witnesses on their behalf and stated that a false case has been filed against them. After the arguments of the learned APP and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned Trial Court by the impugned judgement Page 5 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined and order was pleased to acquit all the accused from the charges levelled against them.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law and evidence on record and the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the fact that all the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and during the cross-examination, nothing adverse has been elicited in favor of the respondents. The case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt and the prosecution has successfully established the case against the respondents and the judgment and order of acquittal is unwarranted, illegal, and without any basis in the eyes of the law and the reasons stated while acquitting the respondent are improper, perverse and bad in law. Hence the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court deserves to be quashed and set aside.
Page 6 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined
4. Heard learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the appellant State and learned advocate Mr. Pankaj Chaudhary for the respondents. Perused the impugned judgement and order of acquittal and have reappreciated the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case.
5. Learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri has taken this Court through the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case and has submitted that the complainant has fully supported the facts of his complaint. The impugned judgement and order is perverse and learned APP has urged this Court to quash and set aside the same and find the respondent guilty for the offences.
5.1 Learned advocate Mr. Pankaj Chaudhary for the respondents has submitted that the evidence has been properly appreciated by the learned Trial Court and no interference is required in the impugned judgement and order.
6. At the outset, before discussing the facts of the present case, it would be appropriate to refer to the Page 7 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined observations of the Apex Court regarding the scope of interference in acquittal appeals in the case of Chandrappa & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka reported in 2007 (4) SCC 415, wherein, the Apex Court has observed as under:
Recently, in Kallu Vs. State of M.P. (2006) 10 SCC 313, this Court stated:
"While deciding an appeal against acquittal, the power of the Appellate Court is no less than the power 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 trial court is based on evidence and the view taken is reasonable and plausible. It will not reverse the decision of the 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 trial court".
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 Page 8 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined 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 further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the 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 trial court.
7. The law with regard to acquittal appeals is well crystallized and in acquittal appeals, there is presumption Page 9 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined of innocence in favour of the accused and it has finally culminated when a case ends in an acquittal. The learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence and when the learned Trial Court has come to a conclusion that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubts, the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused gets strengthened. There is no inhibition to re appreciate the evidence by the Appellate Court but if after re appreciation, the view taken by the learned Trial Court was a possible view, there is no reason for the Appellate Court to interfere in the same.
8. In light of the above settled principle of law, the evidence of the prosecution is dissected and the prosecution has examined PW1 - Dr. Jitendra Kumar Gangaram Meena at Exh. 7 and the witness was working as the Medical Officer at the Referral Hospital and Community Health Centre, Kheralu on 01.06.2006. The witness has stated that at around 09.00 pm, Hemantbhai Hargovanbhai Chauhan was brought without police yadi for treatment with a history of assault injury and he has stated that he Page 10 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined was beaten with a hockey bat. On examination, the injured had a CLW at head on the parietal region 1.5 cm x 0.5 cm x superficially approximately, there was DTS behind the left ear region 1 cm x 1 cm approximately and there was a red contusion on the left cheek region 1 cm x 1 cm approximately. The injuries were with a hard and blunt object and simple in nature and fresh and the patient would recover within 5 to 8 days. At the same time, Bharatbhai Hargovanbhai Chauhan was also brought without a police yadi with a history of assault injury with a bat and on examination there was a red contusion on the right shoulder region 2 cm x 1 cm approximately. The injuries could be sustained with a hard and blunt object and the injury was fresh simple and recovery would be within 3 to 5 days. The witness has produced the medical certificates of Hemantbhai Hargovanbhai Chauhan at Exh. 8 and the medical certificate of Bharatbhai Hargovanbhai Chauhan at Exh. 9. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused the witness has stated that the mother of the injured had come with him and the Page 11 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined history was given by the patients themselves and by their mother. Injury no. 2 of injured Hemantbhai was not visible and the injuries could be sustained when a man who was walking falls down and hurts himself with a stone. There was no injury on the nose of Hemantbhai and if a person dashes against the door, the injury sustained by injured Bharatbhai on the shoulder could be sustained. The certificates do not mention the person who had given the history.
8.1 The prosecution has examined PW2 - Hemantkumar Hargovanbhai Chauhan at Exh. 10 and the witness is the complainant who has filed the complaint which is produced at Exh. 11. The witness has fully supported the contents of the complaint and has also produced the caste certificate at Exh. 12. During the cross examination by the learned advocate for the accused the witness has stated that he knows the accused as they are residing in the same village and at the time of the incident as it was rainy season there was no electricity in the village and it was dark. He was standing at the paan shop of Narsibhai Prajapati and his Page 12 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined brother was at the private milk dairy of Bashirbhai which was at a distance of about 50 feet from the paan shop. His brother Bharat had come 5 to 10 minutes after the incident and the verbal altercation went on for 5 to 10 minutes. There were no other persons at that place and the time for the village people to fill the milk in the milk society is between 05.00 pm to 07.00 pm. At the time of the incident about 30 to 40 persons had gathered together and his mother was at home. He had immediately gone to the Police Station after the incident and had thereafter, gone to the civil hospital after one hour. He did not inform the doctor about how he was injured but his mother had informed the doctor about the same and after taking treatment at the hospital he had gone to the Police Station. The shop of Narsibhai Prajapati and Dineshbhai are near the place of incident.
8.2 The prosecution has examined PW3 - Bharatkumar Hargovanbhai Chauhan and the witness is the injured and brother of the complainant who has supported the case of the prosecution. During the cross-examination by the Page 13 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined learned advocate for the accused the witness has stated that the distance between the private dairy of Bashir Khan and the pan shop of Narsibhai is about 100 feet and about 50 persons had gathered at the time of the incident. The milk society is situated about 30 feet away and a number of persons came running from the milk society. At the time of the incident, it was rainy season and dark. 8.3 The prosecution has examined PW4 - Veerabhai Sendhabhai Senma at Exh. 14 and the witness is the panch witness of the panchnama of the place of offence which is produced at Exh. 15. The witness has fully supported the case of the prosecution and has stated that the panchnama was drawn on 02.06.2006 between 09.00 am and 09.30 am.
8.4 The prosecution has examined PW5 - Maheshkumar Narayanbhai Chaudhary at Exh. 16 and PW6 Jayantibhai Mansangbhai at Exh. 17. Both the witnesses are the panch witnesses of the arrest panchnama whereby the accused were arrested which is produced at Exh. 21. The witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and have Page 14 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined 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.
8.5 The prosecution has examined PW7 - Mayanksinh Ajitsinh Chaudhary at Exh. 18 and the witness is the Investigating Officer who has narrated in detail the procedure undertaken by him during investigation. During the crossexamination by the learned advocate for the accused the witness has stated that the shop of Narsibhai Prajapati is near the place of incident and there are two three other shops nearby. Bashir Khan's dairy is also situated nearby and the place is a public place where a number of persons from the village pass by. The statement of Bharatbhai was recorded on the basis of the complaint.
9. On minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution in the evidence it has come on record that at the time of the incident which was around 07.00 pm, it was rainy season and dark and the incident has taken place on the public road where the shops of Narsibhai Prajapati, Dineshbhai and the private dairy of Bashir Khan are Page 15 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined situated. Nearby the place of incident is also the milk society and the time for depositing milk in the society is between 05.00 pm and 07.00 pm and in the evidence it has also emerged that about 30 to 40 persons had gathered at the place of incident. The complainant examined as PW2 at Exh. 10 and his brother Bharatkumar Hargovanbhai Chauhan examined at Exh. 13 are the only witnesses who have been examined by the prosecution and even though 30 to 40 persons had gathered, no independent witnesses have been examined before the learned Trial Court. The complainant and his brother merely say that the accused were hurling abuses but they have not stated as to what abuses were used by the accused at the time of the incident and which of the particular accused had used which caste slur. The Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of Narsibhai Ambarambhai Prajapati but he has not been examined as a witness before the learned Trial Court and immediately after the incident the complainant and his brother Bharatbhai had gone for treatment to the Referral Hospital and Community Health Center at Kheralu but they Page 16 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined have not named the persons who have assaulted them. The complainant has admitted that he is known to the accused as they are residing in the same village and as per the complaint the spectacles of witness Bharatbhai Hargovanbhai Chauhan were broken and the clothes were torn but no such spectacles or clothes have been seized as muddamaal and in the entire evidence there is no evidence that the accused were present at the place of incident and the incident has occurred wherein the accused have assaulted the complainant and witness Bharatbhai and had hurled caste abuses against them.
10. In view of the settled position of law in the decisions of Chandrappa (supra), 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 Page 17 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/544/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/04/2025 undefined learned Trial Court are absolutely just and proper and no illegality or infirmity has been committed by 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.
11. The impugned judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocity), Mehsana in Special Atrocity Case No. 42/2006 on 21.12.2006, is hereby confirmed.
12. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
(S. V. PINTO,J) VASIM S. SAIYED Page 18 of 18 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 08:20:16 IST 2025