Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Mumtazben Alias Sangita Nabiji Ganchi on 24 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 166 of 2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
MUMTAZBEN ALIAS SANGITA NABIJI GANCHI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
Date : 24/07/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS)
1. Assailing the judgment and order dated 02/12/2013 of the learned Additional Sessions Court, Vadodara in Sessions Case No.129 of 2011 on the file of the said court whereby respondents accused were acquitted for the charges levelled against them giving benefit of doubt, the instant appeal has Page 1 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined been preferred by the State.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
2.1. On 14/03/2011, in between 18:00 to 21:00 hours, accused no.1 with help of others, hatched criminal conspiracy with a clear intention to fulfill their motive and as a part of the conspiracy, accused no.1 by possessing false name being 'Sangita' taken the complainant near Padra Bus Stand and gave intoxicant drug in cold drink. Thereafter the complainant became unconscious and taken to the house of accused no.1 at village Darapura where clothes of the complainant were removed and threat was administered to the complainant for lodging complaint about commission of rape. At that time, accused no.2 identifying himself as 'PSI Sanjay' and showing his false identity as 'PSI Sanjay' obtained naked photographs of the complainant with an intention to involve the complainant in false case of rape. At that time, accused no.2 also slapped the complainant and illegally obtained Rs.70,000/- from the complainant towards settlement of case. The respondents accused also threatened to disclose Page 2 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined their naked photographs if the complainant discloses the said fact before anyone. Accused no.3 identified himself as a 'peon of PSI and taken the complainant at Chansad Road on his motor cycle where threat was given for lodging complaint against the complainant. In the same way, accused no.6 identified herself as 'lady constable', accused no.4 identified himself as 'peon' and accused nos.3, 4, 5 and 7, all with the help of each other, committed offence punishable under Sections 328, 419, 384, 389, 170 read with Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, complainant lodged complaint on 30/03/2011 before Padra Police Station which was registered at CR No.I-48 of 2011 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 328, 419, 384, 389, 170 read with Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. During the investigation, police recorded statement of witnesses, drawn necessary panchanama and as there was sufficient evidence connecting the accused for commission of alleged offence, charge sheet was filed before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Padra. As the offences were absolutely triable by the court of learned sessions judge, Page 3 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined the same was committed to the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara and numbered as Sessions Case No.129 of 2011.
4. Summons were issued to the accused persons and after receipt of summons, the accused persons appeared before the trial court. The charges were read over to the accused wherein they have not pleaded guilty to the charges levelled against them and claimed to be tried.
5. During the course of trial, the prosecution has examined PW-1 to PW-12 witnesses and also exhibited 12 documentary evidence to substantiate the case of the prosecution.
6. On submissions of the closing pursis, further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded with regard to incriminating circumstances made against the accused in the evidence rendered by the prosecution and they have denied the same.
Page 4 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined
7. After completion of the trial, the trial court has acquitted all the accused of the charges levelled against them by the impugned judgment and order.
8. Aggrieved thereby, the State has preferred the present appeal challenging the legality and validity of the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
9. We have heard Mr. Bhargav Pandya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Despite service of notice, respondents did not turn up for hearing, for the reasons best known to them. As it is an old appeal of the year 2014, we are not inclined to adjourn the hearing of the appeal. Therefore, we have decided to go through the record and dispose of the appeal on merits and the material available on record.
10. Learned APP submitted that the complainant/victim Poonambhai Motibhai Jadav is examined at Exh.23. He fully supported the prosecution case and also produced the complaint vide Exh.24. Learned APP submitted that the learned Judge has not properly appreciated the evidence of Page 5 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined the complainant/victim. He further submitted that the complainant/victim has narrated the at length facts of the alleged incident and also identified the accused before the trial court. He referred the ocular evidence of material witnesses and vehemently argued that the prosecution witnesses supported the prosecution case. He further submitted that the material witnesses identified the accused before the trial court. He submitted that the prosecution has established the alleged charges by producing oral as well as documentary evidence. He submitted that the learned trial court erred in observing the minor omissions and contradictions in the evidence of witnesses. He, therefore, lastly, prayed to allow this appeal.
11. We have heard learned APP and referred the material available on record. As a first appellate Court, it is required for the Court to re-appreciate the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.
12. The prosecution has examined PW-5 complainant/victim Poonmabhai Motibhai Jadav at Exh.23. During the chief- Page 6 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined examination, he has stated at length facts of the alleged incident occurred on 14/03/2011 at 6:30 p.m in the evening. During the cross-examination, he has admitted the fact that his residence is near the police station and also admitted the fact that in most of time the police persons are in uniform. He has stated that he has given the complaint after fourteen days of the incident and he went for giving the complaint with other persons. He has further admitted the fact that after arrest of the accused, he has seen the accused in the police station and the police showed the accused to him.
13. The prosecution has examined PW-1 Harishkumar Poonambhai Jadav at Exh.19. He is the son of the complainant/victim. During the chief-examination, he has supported the prosecution case. During the cross- examination, he has admitted the fact that there was no phone call from the accused. During the cross examination, contradictions and omissions are found in the deposition of the said witness.
14. The prosecution has examined PW-2 Kapilaben Page 7 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined Poonambhai Jadav at Exh.20. She is wife of the complainant/victim. During the cross examination, she has admitted the fact that she is not aware about the incident.
15. The prosecution has examined PW-3 Mukesh Poonambhai Jadav at Exh.21. He is the son of the complainant/victim. During the chief-examination, he has supported the prosecution case. During the cross- examination, he has admitted the facts about the contradictions and omissions of his police statement.
16. The prosecution has examined PW-4 Mahendra Amarsinh Jadav at Exh.22. He is nephew of the complainant/victim. It appears that his evidence is hearsay evidence and he had no any personal knowledge about the incident.
17. The prosecution has examined panch witnesses. All the panch witnesses turned hostile and not supported the prosecution case.
Page 8 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined
18. The prosecution has examined PW-12 Vrajlal Joytaram Patel, Investigation Officer vide Exh.41. During the chief- examination, he has stated the at length facts of the investigation of said crime. During the cross examination, he has admitted the fact that he has not obtained call details of the mobile phone. He has further admitted that he has not made done the medical examination of the complainant. In further cross examination, he has admitted the fact that he has not recorded the statement of the soft-drink seller. He has further admitted the fact that during the investigation, he has not recovered any cash amount.
19. We have minutely re-appreciated the above prosecution evidence in light of the charges levelled against the accused.
20. It appears from the record that after fourteen days of delay, the FIR was lodged and no explanation for the same is adduced by the prosecution. It is well settled law that in every case, the delay in lodging of FIR is not fatal to the prosecution case. But in the instant case, the prosecution has remained completely silent about the delay and no Page 9 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined explanation of delay of fourteen days in lodging the FIR. Hence, delay in lodging the FIR is cause to the root of the prosecution case.
21. Considering the facts and circumstances of the prosecution case, particularly the evidence of PW-5, the complainant/victim, major discrepancies are found in his deposition. The other material witnesses are family members and relatives of the complainant/victim and major contradictions, omissions, discrepancies are found in the ocular evidence of the prosecution witnesses.
22. With regard to the question of the identification of the accused, it appears from the record that the complainant/victim and other material witnesses are previously not known to the accused and only on instance of the police, identified the accused. It is also required to be noted that during the investigation, the Investigation Officer has failed to arrange the TI parade of the accused. During the investigation, amount of Rs.70,000/- also not recovered from any accused. Said circumstances create serious doubt in the Page 10 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined prosecution story and the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused of the alleged charges without reasonable doubt.
23. At the outset, it is required to be noted that the principles which would govern and regulate the hearing of appeal by this Court against an order of acquittal passed by the trial Court, have been very succinctly explained by the Apex Court in a catena of decisions. In the case of M.S. Narayana Menon @ Mani Vs. State of Kerala & Anr., (2006) 6 S.C.C. 39, the Apex Court has narrated the powers of High Court in appeal against the order of acquittal. In Paragraph-54 of the said decision, the Apex Court has observed as under:
"54. In any event the High Court entertained an appeal treating to be an appeal against acquittal, it was in fact exercising the revisional jurisdiction. Even while exercising an appellate power against a judgment of acquittal, the High Court should have borne in mind the well-settled principles of law that where two view are possible, the appellate Court should not interfere with the finding of acquittal recorded by the Court below."
23.1. Further, in the case of Chandrappa Vs. State of Page 11 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined Karnataka, (2007) 4 S.C.C. 415, the Apex Court has laid down the following principle;
"42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:
[1] An appellate Court has full power to review, re- appreciate 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 curtain extensive powers of an appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of "flourishes of language" to emphasis 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 is 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 Page 12 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined 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."
23.2. Thus, it is a settled principle that while exercising appellate power, even 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.
23.3. In the case of State of Goa V. Sanjay Thakran & Anr., (2007) 3 S.C.C. 75, the Apex Court reiterated the powers of the High Court in such cases. In Paragraph-16 of the said decision, the Court observed as under;
"16. From the aforesaid decisions, it is apparent that while exercising the powers in appeal against the order of acquittal the Court of appeal would not ordinarily interfere with the order of acquittal unless the approach of the lower Court is vitiated by some manifest illegality and the conclusion arrived at would not be arrived at by any reasonable person and, therefore, the decision is to be characterized as perverse. Merely because two views are possible, the Court of appeal would not take the view which would upset the judgment delivered by the Court Page 13 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined below. However, the appellate Court has a power to review the evidence if it is of the view that the conclusion arrived at by the Court below is perverse and the Court has committed a manifest error of law and ignored the material evidence on record. A duty is cast upon the appellate Court, in such circumstances, to re- appreciate the evidence to arrive to a just decision on the basis of material placed on record to find out whether any of the accused is connected with the commission of the crime he is charged with."
23.4. Similar principle has been laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Ram Veer Singh & Ors, 2007 A.I.R. S.C.W. 5553 and in Girja Prasad (Dead) by LRs Vs. State of MP reported in 2007 A.I.R. S.C.W. 5589. Thus, the powers, which this Court may exercise against an order of acquittal, are well settled. 23.5. It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeal, the appellate Court is not required to re-write the judgment or to give fresh reasonings, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper. Such principle is laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. Hemareddy reported in AIR 1981 S.C. 1417, wherein, it is held as under:
Page 14 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined "... This Court has observed in Girija Nandini Devi V. Bigendra Nandini Chaudhary (1967)1 SCR 93: (AIR 1967 SC 1124) that it is not the duty of the appellate Court when it agrees with the view of the trial Court on the evidence to repeat the narration of the evidence or to reiterate the reasons given by the trial Court expression of general agreement with the reasons given by the Court the decision of which is under appeal, will ordinarily suffice."
23.6. Thus, in case the appellate Court agrees with the reasons and the opinion given by the lower Court, then the discussion of evidence is not necessary.
24. Considering the aforesaid reasoning and bearing in mind the statutory provisions as well as the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present appeal does not warrant any interference in the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned appellate court. The learned Sessions Judge, after considering the evidence on record and on proper appreciation of the same and also after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, arrived at a right conclusion and recorded a finding of acquittal against the respondents-
accused. Upon considering the evidence on record and upon re-appraisal of the same and after considering the facts and Page 15 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/166/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/07/2025 undefined circumstances of the case carefully, we absolutely find no valid legal ground warranting interference of this Court with the said judgment of acquittal rendered by the learned Sessions Judge. The findings recorded by the trial court are based on proper appreciation of the evidence on record and in recording the said findings, no illegality and infirmity has been committed by it. We are therefore, in complete agreement with the findings and ultimate conclusion recorded by the learned trial Court and there appears no reasons to interfere with the same.
25. The present appeal of the State is accordingly dismissed. Bail bond, if any, shall stand cancelled.
26. Record and proceedings be sent back forthwith to the concerned court.
(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J) (D. M. VYAS, J) ILA Page 16 of 16 Uploaded by PATEL ILA KANTIBHAI(HC00194) on Thu Jul 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 25 00:44:12 IST 2025