Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Valibhai Adambhai Patel on 23 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 671 of 2011
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
VALIBHAI ADAMBHAI PATEL & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. C.M. SHAH, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
ADILHUSHAIN M SAIYED(9723) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
BAILABLE WARRANT SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
BAILABLE WARRANT UNSERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 23/07/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appeal is filed by the appellant State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocity) and 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Special Case - Atro No. 38/2010 on 23.03.2011, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506(2) and Page 1 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(10) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Atrocity Act" for short).
1.1 During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent no. 1 - Valibhai Adambhai Patel had expired on 08.11.2018 and the death certificate is issued by Talati Cum Mantri of Vahlu Gram Panchayat, Taluka & District Bharuch hence, the appeal qua the respondent no. 1 stands abated. 1.2 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as "the accused" in the rank and file 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 The complainant - Rajeshbhai Kushalbhai Parmar was the owner of agricultural land bearing survey nos. 275 and 280 situated in village Vahlu and the land was mortgaged with the accused no. 1 for Rs. 70,000/-. The complainant had paid an amount of Rs. 1,54,000/- and had released the mortgage and had given a public notice in the daily Page 2 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined newspaper Divya Bhaskar on 25.05.2010 and had filed a caveat application on the next day. On 15.06.2010, being aggrieved by the action of the complainant, at around 09.00 am, the accused came to the house of the complainant and abused them as to why the notice had been given and also hurled caste slurs against the complainant. The accused no. 1 had a stick and he assaulted the complainant on the right leg and the accused no. 2 assaulted the complainant with fists on his chest. As the complainant shouted his cousin -
Ranjitbhai Ishwarbhai Parmar intervened and saved him. The accused also abused Ranjitbhai and threatened to kill him. The complainant filed the complaint before the Bharuch Taluka Police Station under Sections 323, 504, 506(2), 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act which came to be registered as Bharuch Taluka Police Station II - C.R. No. 44 of 2010. 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 Court of the Judicial Page 3 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined Magistrate First Class, Bharuch and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Bharuch as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Special Case - Atro No. 38/2010 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. 5 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused was recorded at Exhs. 6 and 7 wherein, the accused denied the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.
2.4 The prosecution examined 9 witnesses and produced 7 documentary evidences on record in support of their case and after the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed the closing pursis, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was Page 4 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined recorded and after the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned Trial Court by the impugned judgement 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 Page 5 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court deserves to be quashed and set aside.
4. Heard learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the appellant State and learned advocate Mr. Adilhushain Saiyed for the respondent no. 2. 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. C.M. Shah has taken this Court through the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case and 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.
6. At the outset, before discussing the facts of the present case, it would be appropriate to refer to the observations of the Apex Court regarding the scope of interference in acquittal appeals in the case of Chandrappa Page 6 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined & 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 limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such Page 7 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined 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.
Page 8 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined
7. The law with regard to acquittal appeals is well crystallized and in acquittal appeals, there is presumption 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. To prove the offence against the accused, the prosecution has in all examined four witnesses wherein the complainant - Rajeshbhai Kushalbhai Parmar is examined at Exh. 11, PW2 - Ranjitbhai Ishwarbhai Parmar is examined at Exh. 17, PW5 - Rekhaben Rajeshbhai Parmar is examined at Exh. 18 and PW6 - Nandubhai Kushalbhai Parmar is examined at Exh. 19. The complainant has Page 9 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined mainly stated the facts of the complaint which is produced at Exh. 11 and has also produced his caste certificate at Exh. 12. But during the cross-examination, it has emerged on record that there are civil litigations pending between the parties and the accused no. 1 has filed Regular Civil Suit No. 137 of 2010 before the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bharuch which is pending. The complainant has also admitted that an agreement to sale of the said property has been registered with the Sub Registrar Office, Bharuch on 31.01.2007 and the accused has produced the copy of the registered agreement to sell at Exh. 28. As per the document, the agreement to sell property bearing survey/block nos. 275 and 280 situated in the outskirts of village Vahlu has been entered into between the accused no. 1 and the complainant and the purchase price is fixed at Rs. 1,00,000/- and an amount of Rs. 70,000/- was given as the price of agreement to sell. The document has been executed on a non-judicial stamp paper of Rs. 100/- and has been registered with the Sub Registrar, Bharuch at serial no. 608 of 2007 on Page 10 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined 31.01.2007. It is pertinent to note that as per the case of the complainant, the property was mortgaged for an amount of Rs. 70,000/- but the complainant has not produced any mortgage deed during his evidence. Moreover, the complainant has also admitted that on the next day of the incident, one Saeedbhai Vakil who was his advocate had taken him to the Taluka Police Station and the accused no. 1 had given an application stating that he did not receive the amount and he was called to the Police Station for explaining the same thing. As per the complaint, the incident has occurred on 15.06.2010 and the complaint is filed on 16.06.2010 but there is no explanation regarding the delay in filing of the complaint.
8.1 As per the case of the complainant, PW4 - Ranjitbhai Ishwarbhai Parmar examined at Exh. 17 had intervened and the witness has stated that on the day of the incident, the accused had come to the house of the complainant. The witness has also stated that an amount of Rs. 1,54,000/- was given to the accused no. 1 and the land that was mortgaged was released but during the cross-examination Page 11 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined he has admitted that the complainant is his cousin brother and the land is in the joint names of Nanduben, Rajeshbhai, Ramilaben, Manjulaben and himself and he has not seen the deed of mortgage. That he has no knowledge about the contents of the mortgage deed and he did not ask the complainant for the copy of the mortgage deed and has not seen the same till today. The witness has also admitted that the complainant had executed the agreement to sale at the Sub-Registrar, Bharuch office on 31.01.2007 which was registered at serial no. 608 of 2007 without their knowledge and he does not know the transaction that had taken place between the complainant and the accused no. 1. The witness has also admitted that the accused no. 1 had filed an application before the DSP against him and the complainant on 03.06.2010 and they were called to the Taluka Police Station on 16.06.2010 and has admitted that there is the dispute regarding the land between the parties.
8.2 PW3 - Rekhaben Rajeshbhai Parmar examined at Exh. 18 is the wife of the complainant and she too has stated Page 12 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined that the incident has occurred at her house on 15.06.2010 at around 09.00 am when both the accused came to their house. During the cross-examination, she has admitted that there is a dispute about the land between her husband and the accused no. 1.
8.3 PW6 - Nanduben Kushalbhai Parmar examined at Exh. 19 is a hearsay witness and she was not at the house when the incident has occurred and she came to know about the incident from her son Rajeshbhai - the complainant.
As far as the place of incident is concerned, the prosecution has produced the panchnama of the place of offence at Exh. 4 and the place of incident is shown to be outside of the house of the complainant, whereas, the complainant and all the other witnesses state that the accused had come to their house and the incident has occurred inside the house of the complainant.
9. On appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution, the evidence that has emerged is that the complainant has stated that the land situated in village Vahlu bearing survey nos. 275 and 280 were mortgaged Page 13 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined with the accused no. 1 but no mortgage deed has emerged on record. The complainant has also stated that the land was mortgaged for Rs. 70,000/- and an amount of Rs. 1,54,000/- was paid and the mortgage was released but no such evidence has emerged and there is no witness as to how and where the amount of Rs. 1,54,000/- was given. In fact, in the evidence produced on record by the accused no. 1, the registered agreement to sell has come on record at Exh. 28 and it appears that the complainant has not come with the true facts before the learned Trial Court. There is also a Regular Civil Suit No. 137 of 2010 pending before the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bharuch and in the evidence it has also emerged that the accused no. 1 had given an application before the DSP, Bharuch that the amount as stated by the complainant has not been received by him and the complainant and PW4 - Ranjitbhai Ishwarbhai Parmar were called to the Bharuch Police Station on 16.06.2010. Moreover in the entire evidence, the family members do not fully support the case of the prosecution and they all do not narrate the exact words Page 14 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined that were uttered by the accused at the time of the incident. The caste certificate of the complainant has been produced on record at Exh. 12 but no investigation into the caste certificate has been done and there is no evidence on record as to whether the caste certificate is of the complainant or not and how and when it was issued. As discussed above, the place of incident is in the house of the accused and there are contradictions as far as the place of offence is concerned and all the evidence has been appreciated in detail by the learned trial Court.
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 learned Trial Court are absolutely just and proper and no Page 15 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/671/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/07/2025 undefined 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) and 2 nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch in Special Case - Atro No. 38/2010 on 23.03.2011, is hereby confirmed.
12. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J) VASIM S. SAIYED Page 16 of 16 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:24:58 IST 2025