Gujarat High Court
The State Of Gujarat vs Ashokji Khushalji Rana on 21 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 492 of 2007
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Sd/-
=============================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
=============================================
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
ASHOKJI KHUSHALJI RANA & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MS DHWANI TRIPATHI, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR MAHESH BHAVSAR(1781) for the Opponents/Respondents No. 1,3
UNSERVED EXPIRED (R) for the Opponent/Respondent No. 2
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 21/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant - State
under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') against the judgment and the
order dated 03.01.2007 in Special Atrocity Case No.28 of 2006
passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocity), Mehsana
(hereinafter referred to as 'the learned Trial Court'), whereby, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents - accused from
the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 114 of the
Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC') and Section
3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Atrocity
Act').
1.1. The respondents are hereinafter referred to as 'the
accused' as they stood in the rank and file in the original case, for
the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. As per the report submitted by the learned APP of
Police Inspector Mr.P.D.Darji, Kheralu Police Station, the accused
No.1 Ashokji Khushantji Rana has expired on 20.05.2017 and the
accused No.2 Rajuji Hariji Rana has expired on 10.04.2010. The
copies of the death certificates of both the accused Nos. 1 and 2
have been submitted along with the report of the Police Inspector,
Kheralu Police Station and both the deaths have been registered,
and hence, the appeal qua, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 stand
abated.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
3. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present
appeal are as under:
3.1. On 14.10.2005 at around 14:00hours, the accused had a
fight with Maniben wife of Dungarbhai Bhikhbhai Parmar for
standing in the line to take the money for the milk and they
assaulted her and beat her on the right leg and abused her and
hurled caste slurs at her. The accused had a stick with them at the
time of the incident and assaulted her with the stick and the
complainant Maniben wife of Dungarbhai Bhikhabhai Parmar
filed the complaint before the Kheralu Police Station on 18.10.
2005, which was registered at Kheralu Police Station II-CR No.128
of 2025 under Sections 323,504 and 114 of the IPC, Section 135 of
the B.P.Act and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocities Act.
3.2. After registration of the FIR, the investigation was
carried out by the concerned Investigating Officer and after having
sufficient material against the accused, the chargesheet came to be
filed before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate. As the case
was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, after completion
of the process under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C., the case was
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
committed to the Sessions Court, Mehsana and the same was
registered as Special Atrocity Case No. 28 of 2006.
3.3. 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 was framed by the learned Trial Court at Exh.2 and the
statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs.3 to 5
respectively, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the
charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on
record. The prosecution has examined 07 witnesses and has
produced 12 documentary evidences in support of the case.
3.4. After the closing pursis was submitted by the learned
APP at Exh.33, the further statement of the accused under Section
313 of the Code was recorded. After hearing the arguments of the
learned APP and learned advocate for the accused and after
perusing the documents on record, the learned Trial Court, by the
impugned judgment and order, has acquitted the accused.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court, the
appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that
the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial
Court is contrary to law, evidence on record and principles of
justice. The learned Trial Court has not properly appreciated the
oral as well as documentary evidence on record it its true spirit.
The the learned Trial Court has erred in coming to conclusion that
the learned Trial Court has failed to prove the case of the
prosecution beyond the reasonable doubt. The learned Trial Court
has erred in acquitting the accused through there are ample and
cogent evidence to connect the accused with the crime and the
offences registered against them. The learned Trial Court has also
committed an error in arriving at the conclusion that though the
complainant and the prosecution witnesses have fully supported
the case of the prosecution and there are no material
contradictions, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the accused.
The impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the
learned Trial Court is illegal, invalid, improper, perverse and bad
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
in law and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.
5. Heard learned APP Ms.Dhwani Tripathi for the
appellant - State and learned advocate Mr.Mahesh Bhavsar for the
accused. Perused the impugned judgment and order of acquittal
and have re-appreciated the entire evidence of the prosecution on
record of the case.
6. Learned APP Ms.Dhwani Tripathi for the appellant -
State has taken this Court through the entire evidence produced
by the prosecution and has vehemently argued that the learned
Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence properly and the
prosecution has produced cogent evidence to prove the case and
has successfully proved the case against the accused but the
learned Trial Court has not considered the same and has acquitted
the accused. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by
learned Trial Court is contrary to law, evidence on record and
principles of justice. The judgment and order of acquittal passed
by learned Trial Court is based on inferences, not warranted by
facts of the case and also on presumption, not permitted by law.
Learned APP has urged this Court to quash and set aside the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
impugned judgment and order of acquittal and to find the accused
guilty for the said offence. Learned APP has urged this Court to
allow the present appeal and impose maximum sentence on the
accused.
7. Learned advocate Mr.Mahesh Bhavsar for the
respondents - original accused has submitted that the learned
Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence in true perspective
and has not committed any error in acquitting the accused.
Therefore, no interference of this Court is required in the
impugned judgment and the order of acquittal passed by the
learned Trial Court and has urged this Court to reject the appeal.
8. At the outset, before discussing the facts of the present
case, it would be appropriate to refer to the observations of the
Apex Court in the case of Chandrappa & Ors. Vs. State of
Karnataka reported in 2007 (4) SCC 415, the Apex Court has
observed as under:
Recently, in Kallu Vs. State of M.P. (2006) 10 SCC 313 :
AIR 2006 SC 831, this Court stated; "While deciding an appeal against
acquittal, the power of the Appellate Court is no less than the power
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
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 learned Trial
Court is based on evidence and the view taken is reasonable and
plausible. It will not reverse the decision of the learned 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 learned Trial Court". (emphasis supplied)
........ 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 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the
learned 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 learned
Trial Court.
9. It is a settled principle of law that in an appeal against
acquittal, the Appellate Court is circumscribed by limitation that
no interference has to be made in the order of acquittal unless after
appreciation of the evidence produced before the learned Trial
Court, it appears that there are some manifest illegality of
perversity which could not have been possibly arrived at by the
Court. It is also a settled principle that there is no embargo on the
Appellate Court to review the evidence but, generally the order of
acquittal shall not be interfered with as the presumption of
innocence of the accused is further strengthened by the order of
acquittal. The golden thread which runs through the web of
administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are
possible on the evidence adduced in the case of the prosecution i.e.
(i) guilt of the accused and (ii) his innocence, the view, which is in
favour of the accused, should be adopted, and if the learned Trial
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
Court has taken the view in favour of the accused, the Appellate
Court should not disturb the findings of the acquittal. The
Appellate Court can interfere with the judgment and order of
acquittal only when there are compelling and substantial reasons
and the order is clearly unreasonable and where the Appellate
Court comes to conclusion that based on the evidence, the
conviction is a must.
10. The prosecution has examined PW-1 Dr.Dilipbhai
Nathabhai Bhatpuriya at Exh.7 and the witness was working as a
Medical Officer. In the Community Health Center, Kheralu, on
18.10.2005. The witness has stated that on 18.10.2005 at around
12:30hours, Maniben Dungarbhai Parmar came with a police yadi
for treatment and she had stated that she had received an injury on
her right leg five days before. That she had taken treatment at a
private doctor and she was assaulted with a stick on her right leg.
The injury certificate is produced at Exh.8 and the witness has
stated that on examination, he did not find any marks of injury or
that the injured was beaten up with a stick and he did not give her
any treatment. During the cross examination by the learned
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that there was no
fracture in the x-ray and if a person had a fall, they would have
such type of injury.
10.1. The prosecution has examined PW-2 Kanabhai
Ramabhai at Exh.10 and the witness is the panch witness of the
panchama of the place of offense which is produced at Exh.11.
10.2. The prosecution has examined PW-3, Hussainbhai
Wali Mahammad at Exh.12 and PW-4 Rajuji Kantiji at Exh.13. Both
of the witnesses are the panch witnesses of the arrest panchanama
produced at Exh.26, whereby, all the accused were arrested. The
witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and have
been declared hostile and have been cross-examined at length by
the learned APP, but nothing to support the case of the
prosecution has come on record.
10.3. The prosecution has examined PW-5 Maniben
Dungarlal at Exh.17 and the witness is the complainant, who has
stated that on 14.10.2005 at around 14:00 hours, her son, Alpesh,
had gone to the Milk Society to take his salary and was standing in
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
line for taking his salary, and at that time, the accused came and
slapped him and pulled him out from the line and hurled caste
abuses against him and asked him why was he standing in the line
meant for the Darbars. Her son came crying home and she, her son
and her husband went to the dairy to scold the accused, and at
that time, they beat her with a stick on the leg and had a fight with
her. As she shouted her son-in-law Iswarbhai came and released
her and she wanted to go to the hospital and she was taken to
Visnagar hospital. That after they returned, the elders of the
village, Jivanbhai and Babubhai and others came and they had a
compromise on a Stamp Paper of Rs.10/-. That on the 4 th day after
the incident at around 8:00pm, the accused No.2 came to her house
and once again hurled caste abuses against her, and hence, she
filed the complaint, which is produced at Exh.18. The witness has
also produced her Caste Certificate at Exh.19. During the cross-
examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness
has stated that when her son came home and she went to the Milk
Society, there were a number of persons there and the employees
of the Milk Society were also there. That she did not ask anyone
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
anything but started verbally assaulting them and the verbal
assault went on for 20 to 25 minutes. That a number of persons
had gathered there but she does not know their names. That she
had sustained a fracture on her leg and she was taken to the
hospital at Visnagar. That she and her son had demanded money
from the accused for money for treatment after four days but the
accused did not give her money, and hence, she called her son-in-
law and Jivanbhai and they told her to file the complaint, and
hence, she had filed the complaint. That the complaint was
dictated by her son-in-law and Jivanbhai and she had merely
affixed her signature. That she had received a check of Rs.2000/-
from the Social Welfare Department.
10.4. The prosecution has examined PW-6 Alpeshkumar
Dungarbhai Parmar at Exh.20 and the witness is the son of the
complainant who has stated that on 14.10.2005, he had gone to the
Milk Cooperative Society to take the money for the milk and when
he was standing in the line, the accused No.1 came and he told the
accused No.1 to stand behind in the line, but he pulled him out
and hurled caste abuses and beat him with fists. That he went
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
home crying and told his parents and his brother and they all
came to the Milk Society, and at that time, the accused got angry
and hurled caste abuses against them and beat his mother with a
stick on her leg. That his mother was taken to the Visnagar
Hospital, and thereafter, they had a compromise with the accused
on a Stamp Paper of Rs.10/-. On 17.10. 2005, the accused No.2
came and asked for the compromise paper, and once again, they
had an altercation. During the cross-examination by the learned
advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that when he was
standing in the line, there were about 10 to 15 people in front of
him, but he cannot name them. The employees of the Milk Society
were present and he waited for 10 to 15 minutes. That he did not
talk to any other person standing in the line or the employees of
the Milk Society, and thereafter, he went home. That when his
father and mother came back to the Milk Society, there were a
number of persons standing there and the altercation between
them took place for about 20 to 25 minutes.
10.5. The prosecution has examined PW-7 Balkrishna
Girjashankar Trivedi at Exh.24 and the witness was working as a
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
writer in the Dy.S.P. office at the time of the incident and the
investigation was undertaken by Dy.S.P. Pandor, who has
expired. The witness has produced the documents on behalf of
Dy.S.P. Pandor and the Compromise Deed, which was executed
between the parties at Exh.27. During the cross-examination by the
learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that
during investigation, it was found that there was a fight about
standing in the line and they had recorded the statements of the
employees of the dairy and other persons who were standing in
the line. That Alpeshkumar did not take any treatment and the
further statement of Maniben was not recorded after her medical
certificate was received.
11. On minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the
prosecution, the incident as per the say of the complainant has
occurred on 14.10.2005 and the complaint has been filed on
18.10.2005 after a delay of almost four days, but there is no
explanation with regard to the delay in filing of the complaint. The
complainant has stated that she was injured with a stick on her leg
and she had sustained a fracture and she had gone to the hospital
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
at Visnagar for treatment, but PW-1 Dr.Dilipbhai Nathabhai
Bhatpuriya examined at Exh.7 has categorically stated that the X-
ray was taken and no fracture could be found on the leg of the
complainant. The complainant has stated that she had taken
treatment from a private doctor at Visnagar, but there is no
evidence regarding this on record. Moreover, the complainant has
stated that immediately after the incident, there was a compromise
between them and a compromise deed was executed on a Stamp
Paper of Rs.10/- and the same is produced at Exh.27, but on
perusal of the document produced at Exh.27, the signature of the
complainant is not on the same. As per the say of the complainant
and her son PW-6 Alpeshkumar Dungarbhai Parmar there were a
number of persons standing in the line and the employees of the
milk society were also present, but none of the independent
persons have been examined by the prosecution before the learned
trial court. Moreover, the complainant has admitted that she has
filed the complaint only after advice from her nephew and one
Jinabhai, and they were in the police station with her and they had
dictated the complaint and she had merely affixed her thumb
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
impression on the same. The caste certificate of the complainant is
merely produced by the complainant at Exh.19, but no
independent authority has been examined regarding the caste of
the complainant. Admittedly two incidents had occurred on the
date of the incident; one at the dairy and one at home on
17.10.2005, but there are no independent witnesses to any of the
incidents. What has emerged on record is that the complainant and
her son demanded money from the accused which was not given,
and hence the complaint was filed, and all the evidence has been
discussed by the learned Trial Court.
12. In view of the above, 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/492/2007 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/04/2025
undefined
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.
13. The impugned judgment and the order dated
03.01.2007 in Special Atrocity Case No.28 of 2006 passed by the
learned Special Judge (Atrocity), Mehsana is hereby confirmed.
14. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be
sent back to the concerned learned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J)
F.S.KAZI
