Gujarat High Court
The State Of Gujarat vs Chetanbhai Jagjivanbhai Panchal on 31 January, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 668 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Sd/-
===============================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
===============================================================
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
CHETANBHAI JAGJIVANBHAI PANCHAL & ORS.
===============================================================
Appearance:
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR Y J PATEL(3985) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
===============================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 31/01/2025
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 the order dated 08.08.2007 in Atrocity Case No.18 of 2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Trial Court'), whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents - accused from the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code Page 1 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC')and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Atrocities Act'). 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. During pendency of the present appeal, the respondent No.4 - original accused No. 4 Darshanaben Shishir Harkunde has expired on 20.07.2012. Copy of the death certificate is produced and the same is taken is taken on record on 20.01.2025 and hence, the present appeal qua respondent No.4 herein - original accused No.4 stands disposed of as abated.
3. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:
3.1. The complainant Jashbhai Mohanbhai Vankar residing at village Darapura, Taluka Padra, District Vadodara was the owner of house No.A/4 in Swaminarayan Nagar, Atladra, Vadodara and he had purchased the house about two years prior to the incident. The house was closed and on 23.07.2005, the Page 2 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined complainant went to clean the house as he wanted to shift in the said house and while he was cleaning the house at around 1:30pm, the accused Nos. 3 and 4, who were residing in house No.A/3, came and abused him with caste slurs and told him that he should not reside in this house. That the accused No.3 suddenly caught hold of the collar of the complainant and abused him and they had a fist fight. At that time, the accused No.2, residing in house No.A/17 and the accused No.1, residing in the house No.A/21, came and abused him and told him that he should not stay in the house. All the members of the society gathered and the complainant filed the complaint being II-C.R.No. 120 of 2005 registered with J.P.Road Police Station, Vadodara City, for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 114 of the IPC and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act, on 03.08.2005 . 3.2. 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 and a charge was framed by the learned Trial Court at Exh.4 and the Page 3 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs.5, 6, 7 and 8 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 6 witnesses and has produced 4 documentary evidences in support of the case. 3.3. 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, acquitted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 114 of the IPC and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocity Act.
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 and the same is based on inferences not warranted by facts Page 4 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined of the case and also on presumption not permitted by law. The learned Trial Court has not considered the direct or indirect evidence produced in this case connecting the accused with the crime and has also not appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence on record and has straight way arrived at the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubts. 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 learned Trial Court has not considered that facts that the accused with abetment of each other had given filthy abuses to the complainant relating to his caste and physically assaulted the complainant and hence, the impugned judgment and order deserves to be quashed and set aside.
5. Heard learned APP Mr. Bhargav Pandya for the appellant - State and learned advocate Mr.Y.J.Patel for the respondents - accused. Perused the impugned judgment and order Page 5 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined of acquittal and have re-appreciated the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case.
6. Learned APP Mr.Bhargav Pandya 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 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 the learned Judge is contrary to law, evidence on record and principles of justice. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned Judge 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 allow the appeal and quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order of acquittal and to find the accused guilty for the said offence.
7. Learned advocate Mr.Y.J.Patel for the accused has submitted that the learned Trial Court has appreciated all the Page 6 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined 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 judgement 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 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". (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;] Page 7 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined (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 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.
8.1 The Apex Court in yet another recent decision in case of Sri Dattatraya Vs. Sharanappa arising out of Criminal Appeal No. 3257 of 2024 (@ SLP (Crl.) No. 13179 of 2023) observed as under:
Page 8 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined
31. The instant case pertains to challenge against concurrent findings of fact favouring the acquittal of the respondent, it would be cogent to delve into an analysis of the principles underlining the exercise of power to adjudicate a challenge against acquittal bolstered by concurrent findings. The following broad principles can be culled out after a comprehensive analysis of judicial pronouncements:
i) Criminal jurisprudence emphasises on the fundamental essence of liberty and presumption of innocence unless proven guilty. This presumption gets emboldened by virtue of concurrent findings of acquittal. Therefore, this court must be extracautious while dealing with a challenge against acquittal as the said presumption gets reinforced by virtue of a well-reasoned favourable outcome. Consequently, the onus on the prosecution side becomes more burdensome pursuant to the said double presumption.
ii) In case of concurrent findings of acquittal, this Court would ordinarily not interfere with such view considering the principle of liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India 1950, unless perversity is blatantly forthcoming and there are compelling reasons.
iii) Where two views are possible, then this Court would not ordinarily interfere and reverse the concurrent findings of acquittal. However, where the situation is such that the only conclusion which could be arrived at from a comprehensive appraisal of evidence, shows that there has been a grave miscarriage of justice, then, notwithstanding such concurrent view, this Court would not restrict itself to adopt an oppugnant view. [Vide State of Uttar Pradesh v. Dan Singh]
iv) To adjudge whether the concurrent findings of acquittal are 'perverse' it is to be seen whether there has been failure of justice. This Court in Babu v. State of Kerala clarified the ambit of the term 'perversity' as "if the findings have been arrived at by ignoring or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration irrelevant/admissible material. The finding may also be said to be perverse if it is 'against the weight of evidence', or if the finding Page 9 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined so outrageously defies logic as to suffer from the vice of irrationality."
v) In situations of concurrent findings favoring accused, interference is required where the trial court adopted an incorrect approach in framing of an issue of fact and the appellate court whilst affirming the view of the trial court, lacked in appreciating the evidence produced by the accused in rebutting a legal presumption. [Vide Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh]
vi) Furthermore, such interference is necessitated to safeguard interests of justice when the acquittal is based on some irrelevant grounds or fallacies in re-appreciation of any fundamental evidentiary material or a manifest error of law or in cases of non-adherence to the principles of natural justice or the decision is manifestly unjust or where an acquittal which is fundamentally based on an exaggerated adherence to the principle of granting benefit of doubt to the accused, is liable to be set aside. Say in cases where the court severed the connection between accused and criminality committed by him upon a cursory examination of evidences. [Vide State of Punjab v. Gurpreet Singh and Others and Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar.]
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 Page 10 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined 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 trial 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. In light of the above, the evidence produced by the prosecution on record is appreciated and the prosecution has examined PW-1 Jashbhai Mohanbhai Vankar at Exh.14. The witness is the complainant who has stated that the incident has occurred on 24.07.2005 at about 1:30pm in front of his house. on the day of the incident, he went to clean his house along with his Page 11 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined younger brother Hasmukhbhai Mohanbhai and one Jashbhai Gordhanbhai Patel and while they were cleaning the house, the accused Nos. 2 and 3, residing in the house No.A/3, came and abused them and told them they should not stay in this house. They used caste slurs and caught hold the collar of the complainant and the other two accused came and abused them and he had filed an application at the J.P.Road Police Station, which is produced at Exh.15 and the complaint, which is produced at Exh.16. The witness has also produced his caste certificate at Exh.17. During the cross-examination, the witness has stated that the accused No.1 is working as a lecturer in M.S.University and his brother in-law Jagdishbhai is residing in the same society. That two years after the society was built, he came to live in the society and the incident did not occur on 23.07.2005 as he was at his village Darapura on 23.07.2005, which is at a distance about 15 k.m. away from Vadodara. He had gone to the police station at around 2:00pm and in the application given to the police station at Exh.15, he has not stated that Hasmukhbhai Parmar and Jashbhai Patel had accompanied him to clean his house. That in the application, he has not mentioned that they had come to clean the Page 12 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined house and he has not stated that the accused asked him whether he was cleaning the house as he was to live in the house. The complaint which states that the incident had occurred on 23.07.2005 is not true and the incident had, in fact, occurred on 24.07.2005.
11.1. The prosecution has examined PW-2 Hasmukhbhai Mohanbhai Parmar at Exh.21 and the witness is the brother of the complainant, who has stated that the incident had occurred on 24.07.2005 when he had gone with his brother Jashbhai Mohanbhai Patel along with one Jashbhai Patel of his village to clean the house and when they were cleaning the house, the persons from the house No.A/3 came and told them they were of a scheduled caste and they should not stay near them and they had a fight with his brother. The other accused also came and abused them. During the cross-examination, the witness has admitted that his brother in- law Jagdishbhai Dahyabhai Makwana was residing in house No.A/1 of the same society and he is residing in the society from the time that the society was built. That the accused No.2 was the President, accused No.1 was the Secretary and the accused No.3 Page 13 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined was the Treasurer of the society. That his brother had given a complaint at the J.P.Road Police Station on the day of incident and while the complainant had purchased the house in the society, he was made a member of the society and was also given the share certificate regarding the membership in the society. 11.2. The prosecution has examined PW-3 Jashbhai Gordhanbhai Patel at Exh.22 and the witness is the eye witness to the incident and was present at the house of the complainant along with the complainant and his younger brother Hasmukhbhai Mohanbhai Parmar. The witness has stated that the incident has occurred on 27th of July but, he does not know the year when it has occurred and he and Jashbhai Gordhanbhai Patel and Hasmukhbhai Mohanbhai Parmar were cleaning the house in Swaminarayan Society, at that time, one lady from house No.A/3 came and started abusing them and her husband also came and caught the collar of the complainant. That other two accused also came and started abusing them and gave them caste slurs and told them to sell the house and go away. The witness has stated that he cannot identify the accused as he was present at the place only for Page 14 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined short time and even if they were present before the learned Trial Court, he could not identify them. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that on the day of incident, they had come on a scooter and when he had received the summons from the Court, the complainant had told him that he was a witness and he had to come to depose before the Court.
11.3. The prosecution has examined PW-4 Jagdishbhai Dahyabhai Makwana at Exh.24 and the witness is the brother in- law of the complainant, who has stated that the incident had occurred on 24.07.2005 after 1:00pm. That he was at his home, he heard the shouts and came outside and saw that his brother in- law along with his younger brother Hasmukhbhai Mohanbhai Parmar and Jashbhai Gordhanbhai Patel had come to clean the house and at that time, the accused Nos. 3 and 4 having a quarrel with his brother in-law. They told him that he was of a scheduled caste and he should not stay there and had caught his collar and when he went to intervene, they told him to go home. That they also used caste slurs on him and the accused Nos. 1 and 2 also Page 15 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined came and laughed and shouted them and went away. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that he had booked his house in the society when the society was formed and the society has elected representatives and an elected body and the society is a free hold scheme. The accused No.1 is the Secretary, the accused No.2 is the President and the accused No.3 is the Treasurer of the society. That the society had passed a resolution regarding encroachment done by him and he was aware of the resolution and he had told that he would remove the encroachment after the others had removed their encroachment. That he had not removed the encroachment and he is residing in the society since March, 2003. That he has encroached and constructed a wall and he does not know whether his brother in-law had gone to the police station on the day of the incident.
11.4. The prosecution has examined PW-5 Mohanbhai Muljibhai Parmar at Exh.25 and the witness is the panch witness of the panchnama of the place of incident, which is produced at Exh.26. The witness has stated that he and the other panch witness Page 16 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined Shabbibhai Musabhai Patel, who is his friend, were called by the police and the panchnama of house No.A/4 was prepared in their presence.
11.5. The prosecution has examined PW-6 Ramjibhai Jagjibhai Pargi at Exh.31 and the witness is the Investigating Officer, who has narrated in detail all the procedure that was undertaken by him during investigation of the offence. During the cross-examination, the witness has stated that he had taken over the investigation on 04.08.2005 and in the complaint, the date of the incident is mentioned as 23.07.2005. That on 23.07.2005, the complainant has not given any application or complaint in the police station, and during investigation, it was found that on 24.07.2005, the complainant had given an application, which was being investigated by ASI Vasava of J.P.Raod Police Station. That during investigation, it was found that the accused No.2 was a lecturer in the college but he has not investigated as to whether he was present on duty on 23.07.2005 and 24.7.2005.
12. On minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution, it is on record that the accused No.1 was the Page 17 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined Secretary, the accused No.2 was the President and the accused No.3 was the Treasurer of Swaminarayan Nagar Society. The main complaint of the complainant is that the accused did not want him to reside in the society as he is a member of the scheduled castes and they abused him giving caste slurs and told him them that they would not allow him to reside in the society. In fact, in the evidence of the prosecution, it has come on record that PW-4, who is the brother in-law of the complainant, is residing in the same society since its inception and he is of the same caste as the complainant. It has also come on record that the brother in-law of the complainant has made encroachment and has constructed a wall and has not removed the encroachment even though the society has passed a resolution to that effect. Moreover, it has also come on record that the complainant had purchased the house two years prior to the incident and as per the rules and regulations of the society, he was the member of the society and he was given the membership by the body of the society including the accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 are the Secretary, President and Treasure of the society respectively.
Page 18 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined 12.1. There is a major contradictions with regard to the date of incident and the complainant and the other witnesses have categorically stated that the incident has occurred on 24.07.2005 and the complainant has stated that he had gone to J.P.Road Police Station on the same day and given the application, which is produced at Exh.15. If the application produced at Exh.15 is perused, the date is mentioned 24.07.2005 and the complainant has not mentioned that he had gone to his house along with his younger brother and friend to clean the house and has not mentioned the date, time and occurrence of the incident. In the complaint produced at Exh.16, the complainant has stated that the incident has occurred on 23.07.2005 and the complainant has filed the complaint on 03.08.2005, wherein, the complainant has stated that he had gone to clean his house along with his younger brother and his friend and the correct date of incident has not come on record.
12.2. As per the complainant, at the time of incident, a number of people had gathered and if the evidence of the prosecution is perused, PW-2 Hasmukhbhai Mohanbhai Parmar, Page 19 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined the younger brother of the complainant, PW-3 Jashbhai Gordhanbhai Patel, a friend of the complainant and PW-4 Jagdishbhai Dahyabhai Makwana, the brother in-law of the complainant have been examined and besides this, no other persons have been examined before the learned Trial Court, even though there were independent witnesses. If the evidence of the witnesses are perused, there are major contradictions with regard to the injury and words used by the accused and there is no clear evidence of any injury by any of the accused and the only allegations against the accused No.3 is that he caught hold of the collar of the complainant and if the evidence is minutely perused, there is no evidence as to who amongst the accused had used the caste abusive words and it cannot be believed that each and every accused would use similar words at the time of incident. 12.3. During the further statement of the accused recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused have denied all the evidence of the prosecution and the accused No.1 has stated that he was on duty on 24.07.2005 from 10:00am to 6:30pm at M.S.University and on 23.07.2005 and 24.07.2005, the Page 20 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined accused No.3 was at Bhavnagar. The accused have produced documentary evidence in the form of a certificate issued by GEB Manager, Circuit House, photographs and the log book maintained by the driver, which shows that they were not present on the date of incident as alleged by the complainant but the Investigating Officer has not investigated about this aspect. The main defense of the accused is that it was the malafide intention of PW-4 Jagdishbhai Dahyabhai Makwana as he was residing in the society and he had encroached and constructed a wall and the accused Nos. 1,2 and 3, who were the members of the elected body of the society, had passed a resolution to remove the construction and it appears that he was not happy with the resolution.
12.4. It is also pertinent to note that the complainant has not mentioned his caste in the FIR and the caste certificate, which is merely produced by the complainant at Exh.17, has not been proved by the prosecution. The Investigating Officer has admitted that he has not recorded the statement of any competent authority to prove the caste of the complainant and hence, it appears that the Page 21 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined caste of the complainant has not been proved beyond reasonable doubts.
13. 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 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.
14. The impugned judgment and the order dated 08.08.2007 in Atrocity Case No.18 of 2016 passed by the learned Page 22 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/668/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined Sessions Judge, Vadodara is hereby confirmed.
15. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J) F.S.KAZI.....
Page 23 of 23 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Fri Jan 31 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 01 05:35:41 IST 2025