Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Aadivasi Bhurabhai Sajabhai on 14 November, 2025
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 106 of 1999
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Sd/-
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
==============================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==============================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
AADIVASI BHURABHAI SAJABHAI
==============================================================
Appearance:
MS KRINA P CALLA, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Appellant(s) No. 1
BAILABLE WARRANT UNSERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
MR RAJESH M AGRAWAL(1253) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==============================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 14/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI)
1. The present Appeal filed by the appellant-State challenges the judgment of acquittal dated 14.10.1998 Page 1 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur in Sessions Case No.12 of 1998.
2. The charge framed by the trial Court was to the effect that on 12.09.1997 that at about 20.00 hours, the complainant-Fulabhai Jorabhai was sitting in the osri (verandah) of his house, at that time, accused caused injury with a knife on the back of the complainant's brother-Vaja Jora and thus, the accused was alleged to have committed offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The charge further notes that on the same day and time, in the front yard of the house of the complainant, the accused gave a knife blow to deceased-Mancha Kana on the area between the left side of abdomen and thigh and as a result, Mancha Kana died. Thus, the accused was tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. The charge against the accused was also framed under Section 504 of the IPC for intentionally causing breach of public peace.
Page 2 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Krina P. Calla appearing for the appellant-State has submitted that the judgment of acquittal is contrary to law and not consistent with the evidence on record. The Dying Declaration recorded by the Head Constable at Exhibit 52 and the Dying Declaration recorded by the learned Executive Magistrate at Exhibit 47 clearly state that the deceased was inflicted with knife blows. It is further submitted that the learned Judge has committed an error in arriving at a conclusion that the deceased-Mancha Kana was not in a position to get recorded the dying declaration. It is also contended by learned APP that the learned Judge has committed an error in not believing the evidence of the prosecution witness-Vaja Jora who was present at the time of offence, as he has clearly stated in his evidence that the accused had inflicted knife blow on the deceased. The learned Judge has failed to appreciate that the house of the complainant and the prosecution witness Page 3 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined were set on fire by Mancha Kana and therefore, the deceased-Mancha Kana was assaulted by the accused. The deceased had disclosed the name of the accused before Heema Kodar. The learned Judge has erred in holding that there a was a quarrel between Mancha Kana and the injured-Vaja Jora and therefore, Mancha Kana had inflicted blows to the injured. It is further submitted that the learned Judge has not appreciated the fact that the accused has purchased the 'muddamal' knife for the commission of the offence.
4. The accused was issued with a bailable warrant, however, the same had remained un-served. Learned advocate Mr. Rajesh M. Agrawal is representing the accused-respondent.
5. Having heard learned APP, perused the observations made by the learned Judge while acquitting the respondent-accused, as well as the deposition of 16 witnesses from the side of the prosecution . The name Page 4 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined of the accused that has surfaced on record is Aadivasi Bhurabhai Sajabhai. The certificate issued by PW1- Dr. Shamaldas Mohanlal Chadvan at Exhibit 9 of the deceased Manchabhai Kanabhai Dungasiya. The Certificate at Exhibit 9 records the history that he was assaulted by a chari (knife) at about 8.00 pm on 12.09.1997. The injured- Manchabhai Kanabhai Dungasiya was brought on 13.09.1997 without police yaadi. The certificate shows that Mancha Kana died on 19.09.1997 at 9.20 p.m. in the hospital during treatment. The injury recorded is a wound on the left side of abdomen and two abrasions. The injury No.1 was expressed to be caused possibly by sharp substance and the injuries No.2 and 3 by a hard and blunt substance. As per the Certificate at Exhibit 10 injured Vaja Jora was brought on 13.09.1997 at 10.30 a.m. without yadi, the hospital records the same as the assault by a chari at about 8.00 pm of 12.09.1997. The first injury is the one on the left shoulder while the injury No.2 is recorded of abrasion. The injury No.1 is Page 5 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined stated to be possibly by a sharp cutting substance and the injury No.2 by a hard and blunt substance.
6. The cause of death of Manchabhai Kanabhai Dungasiya as recorded is 'Cardio Respiratory failure due to septic peritonitis due to injury on intestine due to injury on abdomen'. While the post mortem note in Column No.20, states 'multiple suture lines on small intestine at cut slough on small intestine partly at suture time. Intestine content expulsion in perstonia cavity. Cut mesentry C vessels are sutured. Part of mesentry and intesting in slough'. Such was the description given by the doctor in autopsy note. The doctor who had treated the injured as per the Certificate at Exhibit 9 and 10 the same Doctor had given evidence of the conducted post mortem wherein it was recorded that were stitches and wound on the abdomen, there was pus in the tube and rot and because of the injuries suffered, the stomach was filled with pus and therefore, the heart and lungs had Page 6 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined stopped working. The post mortem report was produced in the Court at Exhibit 13. The witness stated that he had continued the primary treatment of Mancha Khanabhai. He had not taken any stitches immediately, he had made arrangements for calling a surgeon but had not made any arrangements for sonography. He had not given any antibiotics to deceased Mancha Kana and had not also recorded his temperature. When the post mortem was conducted, he stated that there were many stitches on the intestine and the pancreas beside the small intestine was safe. Further, he had opined that the surgical wound or the stitches over the stomach had rotten away and had blurred. He confirmed that the direct cause of death of Mancha Kana was septicemia. The Doctor further opined that the injury on the rear side of Vaja Jora was a simple injury. He was given primary treatment. He had further opined that the injury could have been caused by a sharp instrument and had also noted the history given by Vaja Jora Page 7 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined before him in the case history.
7. Further cross examination of the Doctor noted that at 2.05, hours, Mancha Kana was totally conscious and was in a position to give a dying declaration. The Mamlatdar had come, he was told to take the Dying Declaration and the patient was examined at that moment and he was conscious and was in a position to give the Dying Declaration. At the time of both the Dying Declaration, the patient was conscious. At Mark 46/1 and Exhibit 47, there are the dying declarations and the Doctor recorded/identified at the end of the Dying Declaration. The Doctor further stated that the opinion differs from a common man and a Doctor as to whether a patient is in a conscious state or not. The patient was conscious and was in a fit state to give dying declaration but he had written nothing in this regard. As per page No.14 of Exhibit 48 on 13.09.1997 at 12.30 hours, as per the Doctor, the condition of Mancha Kana was serious and had given endorsement Page 8 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined to that effect. The doctor further stated that both the patients were lying in bed and on 13.09.1997 between 2.05 to 2.35 hours, the Doctor was not present in the ward nor with Mancha Kana or Vaja Jora.
8. The defence had tried to bring the evidence on record that the dying declaration has not been recorded in a conscious state of mind. The learned trial Court Judge on appreciation of evidence had come to the conclusion that the incident had taken place between the injured-Vaja Jora and the deceased-Mancha Kana. Both had physically assaulted. Mancha Kana had injured Vaja Jora and Vaja Jora had caused injury to Mancha Kana.
9. The facts of the case as per the complainant is that his four brothers including the youngest-Vaja Jora was staying alongwith him. The PW2-complainant-Fula Jora stated that approximately five months prior to the incident, his grandson, i.e. the son of his son-Babu Page 9 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined had died and people from his community as well as Garasiya Bhurabhai Sajabhai had come for the community meet. At that time, it is alleged that Bhura Saja started passing nasty remarks and therefore, at that time, PW2-complainant asked him not to use such abusive words, informing that the people of the community had gathered there and because of his abusive words, they would get offended. PW2 further stated that the accused-Bhura Saja did not adhere to his instructions and therefore, he had asked him to leave the place, therefore, he went away. According to the complainant, after this community gathering, approximately after 20 days at about 8.00 pm in the evening, Bhura Sama visited their house and invited himself to be their guest and had asked them to prepare food for him. At that time, his son and wife were staying together, his wife was preparing food in the house. PW3 further stated that he had asked the accused to let his son eat first but the accused neglected his instructions and ate first and Page 10 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined thereafter sat on the cot in the front yard of his house with his brother-Vaja. At that time, he was in the house to fill up the chillum (hookah). PW2 stated that Bhura gave a knife blow on the back of Vaja and because of the knife blow, he fell down. At that time, Mancha Kana had come there to intervene and rescue but the accused gave a knife blow on the abdomen of Mancha Kana and ran away from the place.
10. PW2 stated that when he came out, he saw that the accused had already run away and Mancha Kana because of the nature of injuries, had fallen down and as a result, all started to make a hue and cry. This incident happened at about 8.00 p.m. The complainant further states that he alongwith the Sarpanch-Heemabhai Kodrabhai and Govabhai Motibhai brought a jeep from Virampur and taking his brother-Vaja Jora and Mancha Kancha, they went to Palanpur Civil Hospital for treatment. and thereafter in the jeep Heemabhai and Goamoti went to Amirgadh Page 11 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined police where he gave his complaint. During the cross examination the complainant for the complaint at Mark 6/11, he admitted he was illiterate and knew only to place the thumb impression. It is further submitted that Heema Kodar was the nephew of the past Sarpanch and would come regarding work. The witness stated that the house of Mancha Kana was the sole house near the lake and opposite the house of Mancha Kana, there was a house of a veterinary Doctor Taiwan who was also from their community and a 100 meters in the north from the house of Mancha Kana, there was the house of the complainant. He stated that in connection with the incident, their houses were broken down and that the scrap was used to cremate the body of Mancha Kana. He also confirmed that after the death of Mancha Kana, he and his brothers had to run away and until a settlement was arrived at, they would not be able to enter the village. He further stated that from the time of death of Mancha Kana, he and his brothers, i.e. Page 12 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined Veera Jora, Kala Jora, and Vaja Jora left their household and started working as labourers in Village Vajapur Vanka where they were in hiding. He confirmed that if their presence would be detected, the family members of Mancha Kana would have done them to death. He also stated that presently in Gangi Village, they do not have their house and after they pay the community fine for the death of Mancha Kana, they would be permitted to enter the village. He confirmed that the community persons had stated that murder of Mancha Kana was done by them while the police stated that it was Bhura Saja. The learned trial Court Judge on appreciation of evidence has considered this evidence. The learned Judge was also of the opinion as during the death of the son of Babu, the accused would have joined in the community meeting along with others and as the accused was asked to leave by PW2, the accused would have no cause to visit the house of the PW2-complainant and invite himself as a guest of the house asking to serve Page 13 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined him dinner.
11. The evidence of PW2 also become doubtful where he had stated that he was in the house preparing the chillum, while his brother Vaja and the accused were sitting there and Mancha Kana had come there to intervene. Mancha Kana was living at a distance and how he reached there in the night at the house of PW2 is not coming on record. The witness has further stated that blood stains were found but no stains were found inside the house or on the accused. The witness has further stated that he had started shouting on seeing the injuries but no one had come there because of the sounds of Bhajan and after an hour the Sarpanch had come there. He denied the suggestion that the wife of the accused was present even after the incident and the Sarpanch had come at the place of incident.
12. The complainant confirmed that in his complaint, the Page 14 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined Sarpanch and Heema Kodar had put the signatures on behalf of him. The learned trial Court Judge has considered the evidence of the Doctor and the witnesses and had come to the conclusion that the both the sides had suffered injuries.
13. PW5-Himabhai Khodrabhai was examined as a witness. According to PW5-Himabhai Kodrabhai, he was also the Sarpanch for about five years and he knew PW2-Fula Jora. He stated that on the day of the incident, at about 8.00 pm when he was at his home, son of PW2 came and told that PW2 was beaten. Thereafter, they ran to the house of PW2 and according to him, PW5 saw injuries on the back of Vaja Jora and injuries on the stomach and bottom of Mancha Kana. The clothes as well as the bodies of both were blood stained and on enquiry from PW2, he was informed that accused-Bhuro had run away from the place after beating them. In the cross examination, it is stated that on the date of incident, there was Page 15 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined Bhajan and Goro and there was a community dinner at his house. The bhajan had started at 7.00 p.m. and parallel on the other side, the dinner had started. He further stated that as per the custom of Adivasis, if one Adivasi causes the murder of another Adivasi, then the person who has committed the crime has to leave the village and only when he pays the community fine, the accused can enter the village. He further said that all the four brothers after the death of Mancha Kana had left the Village and only on paying the community fine could enter the village. PW5 further stated that his son had told him that both the injured were in an intoxicated state. The witness also confirmed that the house of PW2 would be at a distance of 700 meters from the house of Mancha Kana on the hill. This evidence of PW5 corroborating with the evidence of complainant himself would be sufficient to disbelieve the complainant. The presence of the deceased- Mancha Kana at the time of the alleged incident would become non- believable.
Page 16 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined
14. The learned Judge has rightly observed the inconsistency with regard to the accused joining as a guest of PW2 and asking for having dinner at home of complainant when there was Bhajan and dinner was organized in the house, by PW5. Political rivalry has also been brought on record.
15. The death was because of septicimea. The dying declaration has rightly not been believed by the learned trial court Judge. The Doctor as PW1 who had said that he had treated the injured and also had conducted the post mortem report has confirmed the fact that the deceased was referred at 12.30 pm on 13.09.1997. On 13.09.1997 between 2.05 to 2.35 hours, the Doctor was not present in the ward nor with Mancha Kana or Vaja Jora. The circumstances on record was sufficient enough to believe that PW2 and PW3 had created a false case and the police had filed false case against the present accused. Page 17 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined
16. Further, the evidence of PW3 as injured witness becomes doubtful since there was no enmity worth the name between him and the accused. His house and that of Mancha Kana was at a distance of 1000 meters. He confirmed that Mancha Kana's house and the land was adjoining each other and there was no reason for them to go into each other's house. PW3-Vaja Jora stated that when he was assaulted from the back, he had fallen down on the cot. This fact itself becomes difficult to believe since he had received only simple injury on the back. He had confirmed that he and his brother left the village because of the community people.
17. The observation of the learned trial Court Judge is based on the evidence on record. PW15-Investigating Officer stated that since he was in bandobast duty, the Head Constable of Virampur Police Station Pratapsinh had carried out the investigation. He stated that he did not conduct any investigation nor had enquired for Page 18 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined the period from 13.09.1997 to 20.09.1997 and he did not visit the house of Mancha Kana. He confirmed that there was no public road in front or on the rear side of the place of incident. He confirmed that he had not recorded any statement in connection with the accused thereof at Village Bayla.
18. The controversial fact which has been brought on record is about the prosecution case. The death is because of septicemia. The injury that had been sustained by injured witness is not such an injury for a person to fall unconscious at the place of incident. The prior incident of enmity is not corroborated by any independent witness, rather on that ground as the complainant would not even allow the accused to enter the house. On analysis of the evidence by trial court is in the right perspective, there is no cause to believe the case of the prosecution.
Page 19 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined
19. At this stage, it would be pertinent to refer to the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhagwan Sahai and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan reported in (2016) 13 SCC 171, where it was held by Hon'ble Supreme Court as under :
8. "...Once the Court came to a finding that the prosecution has suppressed the genesis and origin of the occurrence and also failed to explain the injuries on the person of the accused including death of father of the appellants, the only possible and probable course left open was to grant benefit of doubt to the appellants..."
20. The judgment of Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415 : (2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 325, would be relevant to be mentioned since the judgment lays down the general principles for the consideration of the acquittal appeals. The Supreme Court has held thus :
(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. Page 20 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined 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.
21. (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.
22. In the case of Bhupatbhai Bachubhai Chavda and Anr. State of Gujarat, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 523, it has been held as under:
"It is true that while deciding an appeal against acquittal, the Appellate Court has to reappreciate the evidence. After re-appreciating the evidence, the first question that needs to be answered by the Appellate Court is whether the view taken by the Trial Court was a plausible view that could have been taken based on evidence on record. Perusal of the impugned judgment of the High Court shows that this question has not been adverted to. Appellate Court can Page 21 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined interfere with the order of acquittal only if it is satisfied after re-appreciating the evidence that the only possible conclusion was that the guilt of the accused had been established beyond a reasonable doubt. The Appellate Court cannot overturn order of acquittal only on the ground that another view is possible. In other words, the judgment of acquittal must be found to be perverse. Unless the Appellate Court records such a finding, no interference can be made with the order of acquittal. The High Court has ignored the well-settled principle that an order of acquittal further strengthens the presumption of innocence of the accused. After having perused the judgment, we find that the High Court has not addressed itself on the main question."
23. On overall analysis of the deposition of the witnesses and the observations of the learned trial Court Judge, we are of the view that the findings recorded by the learned Trial Court need not be interfered with since the miscarriage of justice which may arise from acquittal of the guilty is not much than the conviction of the innocent.
24. In view of the aforesaid discussion and observation, the present Appeal stands dismissed. The judgment and order dated 14.10.1998 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Palanpur in Sessions Page 22 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/106/1999 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/11/2025 undefined Case No.12 of 1998 is confirmed. Bail bond, if any, stands discharged. Record and proceedings, be sent to the concerned Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI, J) Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J) CAROLINE / DB / # 2 (DC) Page 23 of 23 Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Tue Nov 18 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 18 23:47:37 IST 2025