Gujarat High Court
Popatbhai @ Shakabhai Bhanabhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 26 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 1052 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting No
==========================================================
POPATBHAI @ SHAKABHAI BHANABHAI VALODARA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. S. L. PATEL(8520) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR. PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 26/06/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appeal is filed by the appellant - original complainant under Section 14A of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned 12th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Atrocity Case No. 12/2022 on 03.01.2025, whereby, the learned Trial Court has Page 1 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 504, 506(2), 447, 427 and 114 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) and Section 3(2)(5-A) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short). 1.1 The respondent nos. 2 to 5 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 - Popat @ Shakabhai Bhanabhai Valodara was at his hut on 18.01.2022 and at around 08.00 to 08.30 am, the accused armed with an axe came to his plot and abused him and hurled caste slurs against him and and threatened him and broke his hut and caused a loss of Rs. 4000/- to him. The complainant filed the complaint at Jasdan Police Station under Sections 504, 506(2), 447, 427 and 114 of IPC, Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and Section 3(1)(r)(s) and Section 3(2)(5-A) of the Atrocities Act which was registered at I - C.R. No. Page 2 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined 11213021220055/2022.
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, Jasdan and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Rajkot as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Atrocity Case No. 12/2022.
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. 16 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused was recorded at Exhs. 17 to 20, wherein, the accused denied the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.
Page 3 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined 2.4 The prosecution produced the following evidence to bring home the charge against the accused.
ORAL EVIDENCE
Sr. No. PW Name of the witness Exh.
1 1 Popatbhai Bhanabhai Valodara 27
2 2 Pratipalsinh Ajitsinh Zala 30
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Sr. No. Particulars Exh.
1 Complaint 28
2 Caste certificate of the complainant 29
3 Order of investigation 31
4 Letter 32
5 Panchnama of place of offence 33
6 Panchnama of muddamaal recovered 34
2.5 After the learned APP filed the closing pursis, the
further statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. The accused refused to step into the witness box or examine witnesses on their behalf and stated that a false case has been filed against them. After the arguments of the learned APP and the learned advocate for the accused were Page 4 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined 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 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 respondents 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.
Page 5 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined
4. Heard learned advocate Mr. S.L. Patel for the appellant State and learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the respondent State. Perused the impugned judgement and order of acquittal and have reappreciated the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case.
5. Learned advocate Mr. S.L. Patel 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 advocate has urged this Court to quash and set aside the same and find the respondent guilty for the offences. 5.1 Learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat has submitted tjhat 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 Page 6 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined 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 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;
Page 7 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined (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 Page 8 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined 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 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. In light of the above settled principle of law, the evidence of the prosecution is dissected and the prosecution has examined PW1 - Popatbhai Bhanabhai Valodara at Exh. 27 and the witness has stated that the accused had come on 18.01.2022 and had broken his hut Page 9 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined and threatened him and told him to go away from there and hence, he went away. At that time, the neighbours came and separated them and he had filed the complaint which is produced at Exh. 28. The witness has produced his caste certificate at Exh. 29 and has stated that he does not know who assaulted him and has not identified the accused before the learned Trial Court. The witness has not supported the case of the prosecution and has been declared hostile and has been cross-examined at length by the learned APP. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that he was residing with the accused at Vadod village and he had gone to the Police Station once. The plot is not in his ownership but is a government land and he does not have any evidence that the plot is in his ownership. That he had placed construction material and spade and axe in the plot and if he files a case under the Atrocity Act, he is given financial support by the Government.
8.1 The prosecution has examined PW2 - Pratipalsinh Ajitsinh Zala at Exh. 30 and the witness is the Investigating Page 10 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined Officer who has narrated in detail the procedure undertaken by him during investigation. The witness has produced the panchnama of place of offence at Exh. 33 and the arrest panchnama at Exh. 34.
9. One minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution, as per the complaint, the incident has occurred on 18.01.2022 between 08.00 - 08.30 am when the accused came with Hero Deluxe Motorcycle No. GJ-3- KM-6356 and Bajaj Discover Motorcycle No. GJ-3-EH-7153 and they assaulted the complainant. As per the say of the complainant, the neighbours came and saved him but the complainant himself has not supported the case of the prosecution and has been declared hostile. In the cross- examination, the complainant has stated that he is known to the accused as they are residing in the same village for many years but the complainant has not identified the accused or the persons who has assaulted him before the learned Trial Court. There are no eyewitnesses to the incident who have been examined and the panchnamas have directly been produced in the deposition of the Page 11 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined Investigating Officer. There are no panch witnesses examined and the contents of the complaint have not been proved in the evidence of the complainant.
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 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.
Page 12 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025 undefined
11. The impugned judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned 12 th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot in Atrocity Case No. 12/2022 on 03.01.2025, is hereby confirmed and the case is dismissed at the stage of admission and disposed of accordingly.
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 13 of 13 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Jun 27 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Jun 28 02:27:39 IST 2025