Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Ilaben D/O Kantibhai Motibhai Rathod on 4 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 303 of 2013
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
ILABEN D/O KANTIBHAI MOTIBHAI RATHOD & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. C.M. SHAH, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR PRAVIN GONDALIYA(1974) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 04/09/2025
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 Additional Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Special (Atrocity) Case No. 71 of 2010 on 08.11.2012, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 506(2) and 294B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3(1)(10) of Schedule Caste and Page 1 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined 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 The complainant - Jignaben Somajibhai Balad and the accused were working as teachers in J.H. Sonawala High School, Mehemdabad since the year 2006. On 23.06.2010, at around 10.00 hours, the accused abused the complainant, hurled caste slurs against her and wrote on the blackboard abusive words against the complainant and threatened to kill her if she would stay in Mehemdabad and also told her that she would drive her away from the job.
The complainant filed the complaint at the Mehemdabad Police Station under Sections 506(2), 294(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act which came to be registered at Mehemdabad Police Station II - C.R. No. 296 of 2010.
Page 2 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined 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 as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Special (Atrocity) Case No. 71 of 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. 2 was framed against the accused and the statement of the accused was recorded at Exh. 3 wherein, the accused denied the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.
2.4 The prosecution examined 12 witnesses and produced Page 3 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined 20 documentary evidences on record in support of his 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 the accused from the charges levelled against him.
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 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 Page 4 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined 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. Rohan Vaghela for learned advocate Mr. Pravin Gondaliya for the respondent no. 1. Though served, the respondent no. 2 has not remained present either in person or through an advocate. 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 supported the facts of his complaint. The impugned judgement and order is perverse and learned APP has urged Page 5 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined this Court to quash and set aside the same and find the respondent guilty for the offences.
6. 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.
7. To prove the offence against the accused, the prosecution has in all examined twelve witnesses. PW1 - Jignaben Somajibhai Balat examined at Exh. 7 is the complainant and she has narrated all the facts stated in the Page 6 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined complaint which is produced at Exh. 8. During the cross- examination, the witness has admitted that Gopalbhai Sharma is her husband and she belongs to the Sharma Caste. The witness has also admitted that she had filed the complaint on 28.07.2010 for the incident that has occurred on 23.06.2010. The witness has produced the caste certificate at Exh. 10 and her school-leaving certificate at Exh. 11 and in the document produced at Exh. 11, the caste with sub-caste is Hindu-Adivasi-Dungri-Garasiya. 7.1 PW2 - Arvindbhai Gedalbhai Vaghela examined at Exh. 12 is the panch witness of the panchnama of the place of offence which is produced at Exh. 13. The witness has supported the case of the prosecution and as per the panchnama produced at Exh. 13, the place of offence is the classroom of Class 12A of Sheth J. H. Sonawala High School of Mehemdabad.
7.2 PW3 - Kishanlal Ramdas Chavda examined at Exh. 16 is a teacher working in Sheth J. H. Sonawala High School, Mehemdabad and the witness has supported the case of the prosecution and has stated that the incident had occurred Page 7 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined on 23.06.2010 at around 10.00 hours after the recess was over at the lobby of the staff room. During the cross- examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that whenever a teacher goes to a classroom to take a class, she / he is alone and no teacher would know what has occurred in the class during the period. There was no complaint made to the school about the incident that has occurred on 23.06.2010 and the principal did not know about the incident. 7.3 PW4 - Rajnikant Ramniklal Vajani examined at Exh. 17 was working as a teacher in J. H. Sonawala High School and the witness has supported the case of the prosecution and has stated that on 23.06.2010 at around 09.35 am, it was the recess time and at that time he was present and having tea in the staff room along with Kishanlal Chavda, Sudhaben Soni, Meenaben Dabhi and Jignaben Malad. At that time the accused came in the staff room and abused the complainant and threatened to kill her. During the cross-examination, the witness has admitted that he did not take any photographs about anything written on the Page 8 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined blackboard and he did not inform any superior officer in the school. In the school they have separate staff rooms for the ladies staff and for the gents staff which is at a distance of about 100 feet away from each other. The incident as narrated by him had occurred in the gents staff room. 7.4 PW5 - Sudhaben Ashwinkumar Soni examined at Exh. 18 was a teacher in Sheth J. H. Sonawala High School, Mehemdabad and she has stated that on 23.06.2010 at around 10.00 hours, she along with Vajani Sir, Meenaben and Kishanbhai were present and the accused abused the complainant and hurled caste slurs against her. The incident had occurred in the big staff room. During the cross-examination, the witness has stated that the gents sit in the gents staff room and the ladies sit in the ladies staff room and she does not know whether the accused was teaching any students as she had not gone into any classroom of the accused. She did not file any complaint about the incident as stated by her.
7.5 PW6 - Mayankbhai Gordhanbhai Sathar examined at Exh. 19 was also a teacher in the Sheth J. H. Sonawala Page 9 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined High School and he has stated that on 23.06.2010 at around 09.35 am during the recess hours, he was in the staff room along with Vajani Sir, Jhala Sir, Meenaben and other teachers and the incident has occurred when the accused abused the complainant. During the cross- examination, the witness has admitted that he was never in a class which was being taught by the accused and no student had ever complained to him about any act of the accused.
7.6 PW7 - Minaben Chhotabhai Dabhi examined at Exh. 21 was a teacher in J. H. Sonawala High School, Mehemdabad and she has stated that the incident has occurred on 23.06.2010 between 09.30 to 09.45 am near the staff room. During the cross-examination, the witness has admitted that prior to this incident, no incident has occurred where the accused had stated anything to any person.
7.7 PW8 - Ronak Vikrambhai Patel examined at Exh. 24 was a student of the school and he has stated that the accused would write abusive words against the complainant Page 10 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined and would hurl caste slurs against her in class 12A. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate, the witness has stated that he did not inform anyone about these incidents or acts of the accused and he did not narrate the facts as stated in the statement before the police. 7.8 PW9 - Gaurav Rajeshkumar Patel examined at Exh. 25 was a student of Sonawala High School and a student of class 12A and he has stated that the accused used to talk ill about all others and would tease the complainant about her caste. During the cross-examination, he has stated that he had orally informed the complainant about the words stated by the accused.
7.9 PW10 - Ranubha Kanubhai Chudasama examined at Exh. 27 was the Principal of Sonawala High School and he has stated that on 23.06.2010, Chavda Sir, Vajani Sir, Meenaben Dabhi, Sudhaben, Jignaben, the complainant and the accused were in the lobby when the accused abused the complainant and hurled caste slurs against her. The witness has produced a letter written to the complainant at Exh. 28 and a letter written to the school Page 11 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined Chairman about the accused at Exh. 29. The witness has also produced documents at Exhs. 31 to 41 but during the cross-examination has stated that there were no other persons on 23.06.2010 and he was not present at that place.
7.10 PW11 - Bipinbhai Ratilal examined at Exh. 43 was the PSO who has registered the complaint and has produced the extract of the Station Diary at Exh. 44. 7.11 PW12 - Punambhai Chhanabhai Baranda examined at Exh. 48 is the Investigating Officer who has narrated the procedure undertaken by him during investigation.
8. On appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution, as per the panchnama of the place of offence produced at Exh. 13, the incident has occurred in the classroom of class 12A but as per the complaint, the complainant has stated that the incident has occurred in the school. The place of incident is not specified in the complaint and if the deposition of the witnesses are perused, the complainant has stated that the incident has occurred on the first floor near the classes. PW3 - Kishanlal Page 12 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined Ramdas Chavda has stated that the incident has occurred in the staff room lobby, PW4 - Rajnikanth Ramniklal Vajani has stated that the incident has occurred inside the staff room, PW5 -Sudhaben Ashwinkumar Soni has stated that the incident has occurred in the big staff room, PW6 - Mayankbhai Gordhanbhai Suthar has stated that the incident has occurred in the staff room and PW7 - Meenaben Chhotabhai Dabhi has stated that the incident has occurred near the staff room. PW10 - Ranubha Kanubhai Chudasma who is the Principal was not present at the time of the incident and there is no clarity regarding the place where the incident has occurred. Moreover, the incident as stated by the complainant has occurred on 23.06.2010 and the complaint has been filed on 28.07.2010 and there is a delay of almost 35 days in filing the complaint which has not been explained. Moreover, the caste certificate has merely been produced by the complainant at Exh. 10 but there is no investigation regarding this caste certificate and the complainant has Page 13 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined stated that she has married in Sharma Community and there is no evidence about the caste of the complainant.
9. In view of the settled position of law, 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 14 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/303/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/09/2025 undefined
10. The impugned judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in Special (Atrocity) Case No. 71 of 2010 on 08.11.2012, is hereby confirmed.
11. 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 15 of 15 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Thu Sep 11 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 11 21:42:21 IST 2025