Gujarat High Court
Mayudin Samsuddin Chipa vs State Of Gujarat on 29 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1370/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 1370
of 2025
=================================================
MAYUDIN SAMSUDDIN CHIPA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
=================================================
Appearance:
MR MAHINKHAN H PATHAN(13814) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR. ADIT V PANCHOLI(14657) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Opponent(s)/
Respondent(s) No. 1
=================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
Date : 29/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY)
1. Heard, learned counsel for the appellant.
2. This is an appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 11.09.2024 passed in Sessions Case No. 104 of 2023 on the file of Page 1 of 6 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:35:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1370/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined learned Sessions Judge, Lunawada, Mahisagar.
3. As per the prosecution case, there are four accused in the case. The second respondent herein is the accused No. 2 (A2) in the said case. Accused Nos. 1 and 3 (A1 and A3) were already acquitted of the charges for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 34, 120- B and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) in Sessions Case No. 122 of 2001 as per the judgment dated 15.11.2002. The other accused i.e. accused No. 4 (A4) is said to be absconding and is not yet traced. Therefore, the case against A1 and A3 was separated and they were tried for the said charges and they were acquitted long back in the year 2002. It is stated that respondent No. 2 herein, who is A2, also absconded and thereafter, he surrendered after 23 years in the year 2021 and he was tried and prosecuted for the same charges. After conclusion of the trial, he was also not found guilty for any of the aforesaid charges and he was acquitted of the said charges as per the judgment dated 11.09.2024.
4. As can be seen from the judgment of the trial Court, the entire Page 2 of 6 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:35:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1370/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined case of the prosecution rested purely on circumstantial evidence. According to the case of the prosecution, the deceased got illegal intimacy with the wife of A2, who is A3. A1 is the brother of A2. A4 is the friend of A1 and A2. So, it is stated that all of them conspired together and they have attacked the deceased with fatal weapons like Axe and Spade etc. It is stated that A1 attacked the deceased with an Axe and caused injuries to him on his face and on other vital parts of the body of the deceased and A2 herein attacked the deceased with a Spade, while A3 caught hold of legs of the deceased and the A4 also, caught hold of the deceased. The trial Court, while acquitting the A1 and A3, found the chain of circumstances relied on by the prosecution is not proved and particularly, the motive that was attributed is not proved and also the fact that the deceased was last seen together along with the accused was also not proved and as there are missing links in the chain of circumstances that the prosecution could not establish the guilt of A1 and A3 and thereby, acquitted them. Similarly, in the present case also, the trial Court found that the circumstances relied on by the prosecution to establish the guilt of A2 herein are not proved and the Page 3 of 6 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:35:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1370/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined motive and the last seen together theory are not proved in this case also. Therefore, as the prosecution failed to prove the circumstances relied on by it to substantiate its case against the accused, the trial Court also acquitted the present accused in the said case. It is to be noticed here that when A1 and A3 were acquitted long back in the year 2002, no appeal was preferred against the said judgment acquittal either by the State or by the victim herein who is the present appellant. But, surprisingly, the victim has preferred this appeal against A2. The State has not preferred any appeal against the present judgment of acquittal. At any rate, after perusal of the judgment of the trial Court, it is evident that as the circumstances relied on by the prosecution, more particularly, the motive part and the last seen together theory that was relied on was not proved as the material witness who according to the prosecution has seen the deceased in the company of the accused before his death did not support the prosecution case and he turned hostile, the trial Court held that the said circumstance is not proved. Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any valid reason warranting interference of this Court with the said judgment of Page 4 of 6 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:35:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1370/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined acquittal or the findings recorded by the trial Court. The findings recorded by the trial Court in acquitting the accused are based on proper appreciation of evidence on record and there is no manifest error of law and there are no infirmities found in the said findings of the trial Court. Therefore, the impugned judgment of acquittal warrants no interference and we do not find any ground even to admit the appeal for hearing. Therefore, after perusing the appeal grounds and the copy of the judgment of the trial Court, we are of the considered view that the appeal deserves rejection summarily. No case is made out by the appellant for admission of the appeal even.
5. It is settled law that in an appeal against acquittal, the accused is entitled to double presumption of innocence. The initial presumption of innocence will be reinforced by the judgment of acquittal. Therefore, very strong legal grounds are required to interfere with the judgment of acquittal, which are miserably lacking in this case. There is no evidence at all to prove the guilt of the accused beyond any reasonable doubt.
Page 5 of 6 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:35:47 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1370/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined
6. Resultantly, the appeal is dismissed summarily at the admission stage under Section 425 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
[ Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J. ] [ D. M. Vyas, J. ] hiren/2tss29725 Page 6 of 6 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:35:47 IST 2025