Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Chavada Pareshkumar Damjibhai on 12 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 130 of 1999
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
CHAVADA PARESHKUMAR DAMJIBHAI & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. L.B.DABHI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s)
No. 1
MR MC BAROT(144) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 12/05/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT)
1. The present Acquittal Appeal has been filed by the State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order dated 11.12.1998 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Mahesana (hereinafter referred to as "the Trial Court") in Session Case No.364 of 1997. By way of the impugned judgment and order, the accused have been acquitted of all the charges levelled against them under Sections 302, 323, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") read with Section 135 of Bombay Police Act.
2. It has been reported to this Court that original accused No.1 Chavada Preshkumar Damjibhai died on 03.11.2022, whose Page 1 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025 undefined death certificate was submitted by learned advocate Mr.M.C.Barot on record of the appeal, which was ordered to be verified. The report of the Police station concerned forwarded by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kalol vide its letter 15.05.2024 confirmed the aforesaid facts. Thus, the present appeal qua respondent no.1 - accused no.1 stands abated.
3. The short facts of the prosecution case read as under:-
3.1 First Information Report (FIR) at Mark 17/2 came to be lodged by one i.e., Surendraprasad Harishankar Pandey on 23rd July, 1997 at about 15:00 hours with Kalol City Police Station against accused under Sections 302, 323, 504, 34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 135 of Bombay Police Act.
3.2 After completion of investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed against accused. The Magistrate has committed the case to be tried by Trial Court.
3.3 As per the case of complainant, he was working as manager in Transport Corporation of India Limited and his office situated at near Ice Factory, Village Kalol, wherein he was working as a manager since last two years prior to incident. The deceased - Sharma Vinodkumar Daryasinh was working as Assistant Clerk in his office.
3.4 The alleged incident took place at approximately 13:00 hours on 13th July, 1997, when both accused arrived at their office and requested four parcels from the State Bank of India. However, before the parcels could be delivered to the accused, the complainant asked for payment of transportation charges. Since the accused had not paid the full amount, a scuffle ensued between the deceased and the accused. During Page 2 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025 undefined the altercation, accused No. 1 inflicted a knife wound to the abdomen of the deceased, while accused No. 2, Rajeshbhai @ Rajubhai Damjibhai, struck him on the chest. After the incident, both accused went back to their respective homes.
3.5 So, due to aforesaid injury sustained by deceased -
Vinodkumar, the complainant with the help of others, brought the deceased - Vinodkumar to Government Hospital at Kalol, where he was declared dead by doctor.
3.6 The Investigating Officer recorded witness statements, prepared panchnamas including panchnama of scene of offence, panchnama of recovery and discovery of articles etc. 3.7 Upon completion of the investigation and upon committal of the case to the Trial Court, learned Trial Court, after appreciating oral and documentary evidence on record, has found so many contradictions in the version of witnesses and complainant, who have been examined by the prosecution and the story enumerated by complainant as well as other supporting witnesses, are not found trust worthy. Thus, considering the evidence on record, the learned Trial Court, has acquitted all the accused from all the charges.
4. We have heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.L.B.Dabhi and learned advocate Mr.M.C.Barot for the accused - respondent at length, who have taken us through various oral evidence as well as documentary evidence, which are on record. We have independently examined and appreciated evidence of witnesses.
5. Learned Trial Judge, framed charges vide Exh.11 against the Respondents - Accused for the aforesaid offences. The Respondents - Accused pleaded not guilty and claim to be Page 3 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025 undefined tried. They were tried for the said offences and in order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has also produced oral and documentary evidence.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.L.B.Dabhi would submit that the findings of acquittal are contrary to law in evidence on record and the findings recorded by the Trial Court are erroneous and based on irrelevant material.
6.1 He would further submit that learned Trial Court has committed an error in acquitting the respondents - accused and has not properly appreciated the evidence produced on record, though the prosecution had proved its case against the accused and learned Trial Court has given weightage to the minor omission and contradiction in the version of witnesses though there was no any material omission and contradiction in the evidence of the witnesses.
6.2 Learned APP would further submit that the learned Trial Court has wrongly emphasized on so called contradictions between First Information report at Exh. 17/2 vis-a-vis telephone register maintained by Kalol Police Station at Exh.65.
6.3 Learned APP would further submit that Trial Court has failed to appreciate oral testimony of complainant - Surendraprasad and other witness - Mukeshkumar, who has categorically confirmed that the accused no.1 had inflicted knife wound on vital part of the body of the deceased - Vinodkumar, resulted into his death. As such, the prosecution has proved the charges against accused beyond doubt.
6.4 Learned APP would further submit that Post Mortem Page 4 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025 undefined Report at Exh.45 has been duly proved by examination of Dr.Sarla Pukhraj Daga at exh.42, whereby, it has been confirmed that cause of death was result of stabbing. He would submit that when two eyewitnesses have confirmed the involvement of accused, wherein accused no.1 has inflicted knife blow on abdomen of deceased, they ought to have been punished the serious offence.
6.5 Thus, the reasons assigned by the learned Trial Court while acquitting the accused are unjust, improper, perverse and unwarranted to the facts of the prosecution case and thereby, has committed an error in acquitting the accused. It is further submitted that the prosecution has established the guilt of all the accused and learned Trial Court has committed an error both on law and facts.
6.6 Thus, the learned Trial Court has wrongly recorded the order of acquittal, which deserves to be quashed and appropriate sentences for the offences be passed against all the accused and he urged this Court to allow the captioned appeal.
7. Per contra, learned advocate, Mr.M.C.Barot appearing for the accused has vehemently opposed the appeal contenting, inter alia, that prosecution has miserably failed to prove charges levelled against accused. At the outset, he would submit that the main allegation for commission of Crime was levelled against accused no.1, allegedly inflicting blow of knife on the vital part of body of deceased - Vinodkumar and as such, during the pendency of the appeal, the accused no.1 died, nothing survive in the present appeal.
7.1 Nonetheless, learned advocate, Mr.Barot would submit Page 5 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025 undefined that so far as role of accused no.2 is concerned, except the allegation of hitting hand blow on the chest of the deceased - Vinodbhai, which is admittedly not the cause of death, nothing adverse has come on record against accused no.2. The prosecution has failed to prove the charges under Section 34 of I.P.C. and as such, in absence of any motive established on record, accused no.2 may not be punished for alleged offence committed by accused no.1.
7.2 He would further contended that the entire story of complainant is concocted one and version of testimonies of witnesses contradicts each other and Trial Court has correctly observed that facts, which are noted in Exh.65 in telephone Register maintained by Kalol Police Station, wherein alleged incident took place near the office of Transport Corporation of India and not inside the office.
7.3 He would further submit that the learned Trial Court has properly appreciated the evidence on record and having found various anomalies in evidence of prosecution. He would further submit that as per First Information received by police recorded in telephone register at Exh.65, one person, namely, Narendrakumar Ramjibhai Chawda was accused but he was not arraigned as an accused and conveniently not examined by prosecution.
7.4 He would further submit that in a case of acquittal, there would be a total presumption of innocence in favour of accused and as per such legal position of law and criteria laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India while deciding appeal against order of acquittal, this Court may not disturb the order of acquittal. Thus, the learned Trial Court has correctly acquitted the accused so he has requested this Page 6 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025 undefined Court not to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
8. We have gone through the records and after re-appreciating the evidence and keeping in mind, the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court of India while deciding acquittal appeal, we deem it appropriate to decide the appeal.
9. Before dealing with merit of the appeal, at this stage, we would like to remind ourselves the position of law by Supreme Court of India in its various decisions, whereby it has laid down several criteria while deciding acquittal appeal.
10. One of the recent pronouncement, in which, the Supreme Court of India in a case of Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and Others vs. State of Karnataka [(2024) 8 SCC 149] has held as under:
"39. This Court in the case of Rajesh Prasadv. State of Bihar and Another, (2022) 3 SCC 471 encapsulated the legal position covering the field after considering variousearlier judgments and held as below: -
"29. After referring to a catena of judgments, this Court culled out the following general principles regarding the powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal in the following words: (Chandrappa case [ Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415 ] " 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, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
(2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 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.Page 7 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025 undefined (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 emphasise 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 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."
40. Further, in the case of H.D. Sundara & Ors. v. State of Karnataka, (2023) 9 SCC 581 this Court summarized the principles governing the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of CrPC as follows: -
"8.1.The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the presumption of innocence;
8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;
8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after re- appreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the trial court is a possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;
8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was Page 8 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025 undefined also possible; and 8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible."
41. Thus, it is beyond the pale of doubt that the scope of interference by an appellate Court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial Court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:-
41.1 That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity; 41.2 That the same misreading/omission to evidence on record; is based on a consider material 41.3 That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record.
42. The appellate Court, in order to interfere with the judgment of acquittal would have to record pertinent findings on the above factors if it is inclined to reverse the judgment of acquittal rendered by the trial Court."
11. Now, keeping in mind the aforesaid ratio and after appreciating the evidence on record qua surviving accused, due to following reasons, we would not like to disturb the order of acquittal passed by Trial Court.
12. We have gone through the impugned judgment and re-
appreciated entire sets of evidence so as to confirm whether the surviving accused could have been held guilty for commission of crime. Nonetheless, we could not find any infirmity either in findings so recorded by Trial Court and its ultimate conclusion by which accused no.2 has been acquitted from the aforesaid charges.
13. The Trial Court has considered the oral as well as documentary evidence, whereby, each and every relevant witness and the evidence has been discussed. The learned Page 9 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025 undefined Trial Court has considered the aspect with regards to contradictions in the evidence of prosecution so observed in para 27 of the impugned judgment, whereby, arrived at a conclusion that prosecution has failed to prove the incident so narrated by them so, gave benefit of doubt to accused no.1. This Court would have re-appreciated the evidence came on record but as such, accused no.1 died during the pendency of appeal, thereby, qua him, the present appeal stands abated.
14. So far as role of accused no.2 is concerned, except the allegation that he has hit on the chest of deceased - Vinodkumar i.e. handblow, nothing further has been stated by any of the witnesses of the prosecution. The cause of death came on record by way of post mortem report (Exh.45), would indicate that death of deceased - Vinodbhai was due to rupture of vital organ - Liver - Spleen - Left Kidney - intestine, as a result of stabbing. This fact is also confirmed by oral evidence of Dr.Sarla Daga at Exh.42.
15. Further, the observation of Trial court that as per First Information received by police recorded in telephone register at Exh.65, one person, namely, Narendrakumar Ramjibhai Chawda was accused but he was not arraigned as an accused and conveniently not examined by prosecution, whereby, prosecution has not brought the truth on record and further having found the place of incident, the presence of accused no.1 doubtful and circumstantial evidence so gathered by prosecution, were not found sufficient to bring home the charges against accused. Thus, the Trial Court acquitted them.
Page 10 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/130/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/05/2025 undefined
16. As such, considering the over all facts and circumstances and evidence come on record and further in absence of any proof to show any common intention shared by both accused for commission of crime, thereby, having failed to prove charges under Section 34 of I.P.C., accused no.2 could not have been held guilty of commission of crime, for which he was charge- sheeted.
17. Thus, after going through evidence and its re-appreciation as well as reasons assigned by learned Trial Court, the prosecution has failed to prove that the charges against accused no.2 are just and proper and we are in complete agreement with reasons assigned by the learned Sessions Court while acquitting accused no.2.
18. Considering these set of evidences on record and in light of the latest decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reproduced hereinabove, which deals with the law on acquittal, we are of the opinion that no error has been committed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahesana, in Sessions Case No.364 of 1997 while acquitting the respondents.
19. The appeal is accordingly DISMISSED. Resultantly, the impugned judgment and order of the trial court is hereby confirmed. Bail bond, if any, shall stand cancelled. Record and proceedings, if called for, be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
(NISHA M. THAKORE,J) (MAULIK J.SHELAT,J) MOHD MONIS Page 11 of 11 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Thu May 15 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 16 00:42:34 IST 2025