Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Gelabhai @ Ghelabhai Merubhai Rabari on 30 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 776 of 2011
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
GELABHAI @ GHELABHAI MERUBHAI RABARI & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. C.M. SHAH, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR HARSHAD K PATEL(2844) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 30/07/2025
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 and 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Special (SCST) Case No. 32/2010 on 15.03.2011, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 323, 504 and 506(2) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(10) of Schedule Page 1 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Atrocity Act" for short). 1.1 The respondent is hereinafter referred to as "the accused" as he 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 29.10.2009, at around 09.30 am, the complainant
- Sonalben Kalidas Mahida and her mother - Ramilaben Kalidas Mahida were going to wash clothes near the canal at village Akhlacha and the accused came on his motorcycle near the complainant and started abusing the complainant and asked her why she had filed an application against him.
The accused also threatened that he would disrepute her name in the village in such a way that she would not be able to show her face and also told her to compromise with him and have a relationship with him. The accused gave the complainant one slap on her right cheek and caused hurt to the complainant and the complainant filed a complaint at the Mehemdabad Police Station under Sections 354, 323, Page 2 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined 504, 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1) (10)(11) of the Atrocity Act which came to be registered at Mehemdabad Police Station I - C.R. No. 265 of 2009. 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 Magistrate First Class, Mehemdabad and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Kheda at Nadiad as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Special (SCST) Case No. 32/2010.
2.3 The accused was 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. 4 was framed against the accused and the statement of the accused was recorded at Exh. 5, wherein, the accused denied the contents of the Page 3 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.
2.4 The prosecution examined 10 witnesses and produced 8 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 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 Page 4 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined elicited in favor of the respondent. The case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt and the prosecution has successfully established the case against the respondent 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.
4. Heard learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the appellant State and learned advocate Mr. Manish Acharya for learned advocate Mr. H.K. Patel. Though served, none has appeared on behalf of the respondent no. 2 to make any submissions. 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 Page 5 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined 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. Manish Acharya for the respondent no. 1 has submitted that the learned Trial Court has appreciated the evidence and passed the impugned judgement and order and no interference is required hence, the appeal may be rejected.
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 & 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 Page 6 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined 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 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 Page 7 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined 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 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 Page 8 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined 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 bring home the charge against the accused, the prosecution has examined the complainant - PW1 - Sonalben Kalidas Mahida at Exh. 10 and she has mainly stated the contents of the complaint which is produced at Exh. 13. The complainant has produced her caste certificate at Exh. 11. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the complainant has stated that the accused resides at village Akalacha, a little away from the house of the complainant and is doing the business of cattle rearing. The goats and sheep of the accused graze in the area behind the house of the complainant. Moreover, at the time of the incident, it was the month of October and the labourers were working in the field, harvesting the crop. Her father did not accompany Page 9 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined her on the date of the incident and she was provided with police protection after the incident.
8.1 PW2 - Kalidas Bhulabhai Mahida examined at Exh. 15 is the father of the complainant and in the examination in chief, he has stated that the incident occurred and at the time of the incident, the accused caught hold of the hand of the complainant, and hurled caste slurs against her. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that after his wife and daughter had gone to go to wash clothes at the pond, he left his house after five minutes and the accused met him near the high school. The witness has also admitted that there is an area behind his house where they grow vegetables and has also admitted that his daughter was not married in their community but was married to a person from the Christian community.
8.2 PW3 - Ramilaben Kalidas Mahida examined at Exh. 17 is the mother of the complainant who was accompanying the complainant on the date of the incident and she too has supported the facts of the complaint. During the cross- Page 10 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has admitted that the accused resides near their house and they grow vegetables behind their house and the goats and sheep of the accused damage those crops. At the time of the incident, there were labourers working in the fields and her husband came five minutes after the incident. The witness has also admitted that her daughter to a person was married in the Christian community. 8.3 PW4 - Jeetendrabhai Kalidas Mahida examined at Exh. 18 is the brother of the complainant who has supported the case of the prosecution and has also stated that the accused had caught hold of the hand of his sister. During the cross- examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has admitted to growing vegetables and pulses behind their house and goats and sheep of the accused come to that area and cause damage. The witness has also admitted that his father had a dispute with the accused regarding the cattle entering into the area and damaging their crops and at the time of the incident, there were others from the village who were also going to wash clothes but he Page 11 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined is not a witness to the incident.
8.4 PW5 - Dr. Dineshbhai Ramanbhai Patel examined at Exh. 21 is the Medical Officer who was on duty at Nagarpalika General Hospital, Mehmedabad on the date of the incident. The witness has stated that on 30.10.2009 at around 11.00 am, the complainant Sonalben Kalidas Mahida had come for treatment and she had a history of assault. On examination, she had a contusion over right side of the chest, an injury over right side of the chest and besides that, she did not have any other injuries. During the cross-examination, the witness has admitted that the police yadi for treatment was given on 29.10.2009 and the patient had come on 30.10.2009. In the medical certificate produced at Exh. 23, the injury is not shown and the patient did not say that she was slapped on her cheek. 8.5 PW6 - Ambalal Chhotabhai Patel examined at Exh. 24 is the panch witness of the panchnama of the place of offence, which is produced at Exh. 25. As per the panchnama, the place of offence is the RCC Road going towards the High School of Akalacha village on the left side Page 12 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined of the road going from Rudan to Khatraj Crossroads. 8.6 PW7 - Somabhai Fatabhai Jadhav examined at Exh. 26 and PW8 - Ashokbhai Chandulal Parmar examined at Exh. 30 are the panch witnesses of the arrest panchnama produced at Exh. 27. Both the witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and have been declared hostile.
8.7 PW9 - Jaisinghbhai Ranchodbhai Chauhan examined at Exh. 32 is the PSO who has recorded the complaint of the complainant and thereafter registered the same. During the cross examination, the witness has stated that the place of offence was not exactly mentioned in the complaint. The witness has produced the extract of the Station Diary at Exh. 33.
8.8 PW10 - Poonambhai Shanabhai Baranda examined at Exh. 35 is the Investigating Officer who has narrated the procedure undertaken by him during investigation. During cross examination, the witness has admitted that the complainant was married in Ahmedabad and was residing at her father's house and he did not investigate whether the Page 13 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined complainant was a member of the Scheduled Caste or not. The witness has admitted that the complainant was married to a person in the Christian community and the caste certificate produced is dated 10.06.2002 but he cannot for sure say whether the complainant was a member of the Scheduled Caste or not.
9. Upon minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution, in the complaint produced at Exh. 12, the complainant has stated that she was slapped and abused but PW2 - Kalidas Bhulabhai Mahida - the father of the complainant, PW3 - Ramilaben Kalidas Mahida - the mother of the complainant and PW4 - Jeetendrabhai Kalidas Mahida - the brother of the complainant have all stated that the accused had caught hold of the hand of the complainant. At the time of the incident, PW3 - Ramilaben Kalidas Mahida was with the complainant and the father and brother of the complainant were not eyewitnesses to the incident and there appears to be a huge exaggeration in the evidence of the father and brother of the complainant. Moreover, it has also emerged on record that the incident Page 14 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined has occurred on 29.10.2009 and the Yadi for treatment was given on 29.10.2009 but the complainant had gone for treatment to the Nagarpalika General Hospital on 30.10.2007 at 11.00 a.m. As per the medical certificate produced at Exh. 23, a contusion was over the right side of the chest of the complainant but there was no mention of any assault by the accused on the chest of the complainant in the complaint. Moreover, in the deposition of the complainant, she has not stated that the accused had hurled any caste slurs against her and in the entire evidence, it has emerged that there is an area behind the house of the complainant where they grow vegetables and pulses and the accused who is in the business of cattle rearing has goats and sheep and the cattle would enter into this area and damage the crops of the family of the complainant. It has also emerged that on the previous day, the cattle had entered and damaged the crops and there was a dispute between the father of the complainant and the accused regarding the damage done to the crops. It has also emerged on record that there were other people going Page 15 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined to the pond to wash clothes and the area as per the place of offence as mentioned in the panchnama produced at Exh. 25 is a public place where a number of persons would be passing by but no independent witnesses have been examined by the prosecution. If the complaint produced at Exh. 12 is produced, there is no exact place of offence mentioned by the complainant and all the evidence has been appreciated 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 illegality or infirmity has been committed by the learned Trial Court and this Court is in complete agreement with Page 16 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/776/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 30/07/2025 undefined 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 and 3 rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad in Special (SCST) Case No. 32/2010 on 15.03.2011, 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 17 of 17 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 01 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 02 00:45:37 IST 2025