Gujarat High Court
Dineshkumar Achlanand Rathi vs State Of Gujarat on 22 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 604 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
==========================================================
DINESHKUMAR ACHLANAND RATHI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
D A RATHI(7410) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
PARTY IN PERSON(5000) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS CM SHAH, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 22/07/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant - original
complainant under Section 413 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as 'the BNSS') against the
impugned judgment and the order passed in Criminal Case
No.1900409 of 2012 by the learned Additional 35th Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad City (hereinafter referred to as
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
'the learned Trial Court') on 07.02.2025, wherein, the learned Trial
Court acquitted the accused for the offence punishable under
Sections 294(B), 427, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code
(hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC').
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. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present
appeal are as under:
2.1. The complainant Dineshkumar Achalanand Rathi filed
a complaint on 27.03.2012 stating that he is residing at Suramya
Apartments, and on 26.03.2012, while he was outside at around
10.30pm, H.V.Bhatt telephoned him and told him that the accused
were damaging the wall of the apartment and had threatened to
break the hands and legs of the complainant and witnesses
H.V.Bhatt and Pratik Ramakant Patel. The complainant filed the
complaint being II-C.R.No. 3049 of 2012 with Ghatlodiya Police
Station for the offences under sections 427, 506(2) 294(B) and 114 of
the IPC.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
2.2. 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, which was
registered as Criminal Case No. 1900409 of 2012.
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 and
a charge was framed by the learned Trial Court at Exh.2 and the
plea of the accused was 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 03 witnesses and has produced 03
documentary evidences in support of the case.
2.4. After the closing pursis was submitted by the learned
APP, the further statements of the accused under Section 313 of the
Code were recorded, wherein, the accused denied the evidence
produced by the prosecution and stated that a false case has been
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
registered against them. 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 or the
offence punishable under Sections 294(B), 427, 506(2) and 114 of
the IPC.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court, the
appellant - original complainant has filed the present appeal
mainly stating that the impugned judgment and order passed by
learned the Trial Court is totally illegal and bad in law, evidence
on record and principles of justice. The learned Trial Court has
erred in not considering the statement of witness made before the
Investigating Officer and confirmed the incident took place at the
place of the complainant. The learned Trial Court has
misinterpreted the legal position of law and has not properly
appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence on record in
its true spirit. The learned Trial Court has erroneously came to the
conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
reasonable doubt. The impugned judgment and order of acquittal
passed by the learned Trial Court is illegal, invalid, improper,
perverse and bad in law and the same deserves to be quashed and
set aside.
4. Heard the appellant - Dineshkumar Achaldas Rathi
who appeared in-person and learned APP Ms.C.M.Shah for the
respondent - State. Perused the impugned judgment and order of
acquittal and have re-appreciated the entire evidence of the
prosecution on record of the case.
5. The appellant - Dineshkumar Achaldas Rathi 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 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 appellant - Dineshkumar Achaldas Rathi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
has urged this Court to quash and set aside the impugned
judgment and order of acquittal and to find the accused guilty for
the said offence and impose maximum sentence on the accused.
5.1. Learned APP Ms.C.M.Shah for the respondent - State
has adopted the arguments of the appellant - Dineshkumar
Achaldas Rathi and has submitted that appropriate order may be
passed.
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 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
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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
decision of the 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 ac-
quittal 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 cir-
cumstances', 'distorted conclusions', 'glaring mistakes',
etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an ap-
pellate Court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phrase-
ologies are more in the nature of 'flourishes of language'
to emphasize the reluctance of an appellate Court to in-
terfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the
Court to review the evidence and to come to its own con-
clusion.
(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 avail-
able 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 acquit-
tal, the presumption of his innocence is further rein-
forced, 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.
7. It is a settled principle of law that in an appeal against
acquittal, the Appellate Court is circumscribed by limitation that
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
no interference has to be made in the order of acquittal unless after
appreciation of the evidence produced before the 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 trial 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
8. The complainant Dineshkumar Achalanand Rathi has
been examined at Exh.10, and admittedly, he is not an eye witness
to the incident and the complaint has been filed on 27.03.2012,
whereas, the incident has occurred on 26.03.2012. The
complainant, in the examination-in-chief, has narrated the facts as
stated in the complaint and has stated that he has not produced
any evidence about the ownership of the house to the
Investigating Agency and there is an open space in front of his flat.
That he was informed on the telephone about the incident by
H.V.Bhatt and he is not an eye witness to the incident and as he is
not an eye witness to the incident, he cannot say with certainty
whether the accused had abused anyone. The complaint has been
filed on the next day and in his examination in chief, he has stated
that there was a damage of Rs.20,000/-, but in the complaint, it is
stated that the damage was up to Rs.2,000/-, but he cannot say as
to who had caused the damage and he was not present at the time
of the incident.
8.1. PW-2 Premjibhai Mokabhai Patel has been examined at
Exh.12 and the witness has stated that on 26.03.2012, while he was
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
working in the Inway Squad at the Ghatlodiya Police Station, he
got the information in the Ghatlodiya mobile about a quarrel at
'Suramya Apartment' and he went to the spot and the complaint
was filed by the complainant on the next day. That he had arrested
the accused but he did not draw any panchnama of the place of
offence and there are no photographs about the place of incident.
That no evidence about the wall that was damaged was collected
during investigation and no statements of any independent
witnesses were recorded during investigation.
8.2. PW-3 Pratikbhai Ramakant Patel examined at Exh.13,
as per the case of the prosecution, was also a resident of 'Suramya
Apartment' and an eye witness to the incident. The witness has
stated that in the year 2012-13, the renovation of his flat in
'Suramya Apartment' was going on and he was residing on rent in
'Abhinandan Apartment'. That while he was at home,
Priyavadanbhai telephoned his father and informed him that some
destruction was going on in 'Suramya Apartment'. He went to
'Suramya Apartment' between 11:00 and 12:00 hours at night and
saw that the wall was damaged and the outside tiles were also
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
damaged. They went to the Ghatlodiya Police Station and filed the
complaint regarding an altercation at 'Suramya Apartment', but he
does not recognize anyone, who was present and who caused the
damage. The witness has not supported the case of the prosecution
and has been declared hostile and during the cross-examination by
the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that he
does not know the persons, who had the verbal altercation and he
did not file any complaint as he is not an eye witness to the
incident.
9. On minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the
prosecution, the complainant has filed a complaint but he is not an
eye witness to the incident and the only eyewitness to the incident
is PW-3 Pratikbhai Ramakant Patel examined at Exh.13, who has
not supported the case of the prosecution and has been declared
hostile. Admittedly, the offence, as per the complaint, has occurred
in the residential area at night and there were other residents of
the flats, but the prosecution has not examined any independent
witness to the incident. There is nothing on record to show that the
incident has occurred as the complainant is not an eye witness to
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
the incident and he has admitted that he was informed about the
incident through H.V.Bhatt, but said H.V.Bhatt has not been
examined as a witness before the learned Trial Court. The only
witness PW3, Pratikbhai, Ramakhanbhai Patel has not supported
the case of the prosecution and there is no iota of evidence that the
incident has ever occurred as narrated by the complainant in the
complaint.
10. In view of the above, the 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 Trial Court has appreciated
all the evidence and this Court is of the considered opinion that
the Trial Court was completely justified in acquitting the accused
of the charges leveled against them. The findings recorded by the
Trial Court are absolutely just and proper and no illegality or
infirmity has been committed by the trial Court and this Court is
in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and
the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court. This
Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/604/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/07/2025
undefined
and order and the present appeal is devoid of merits and
resultantly, the same is dismissed at the stage of admission.
11. The impugned judgment and the order passed in
Criminal Case No.1900409 of 2012 by the learned Additional 35 th
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad City on
07.02.2025 is hereby confirmed.
12. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be
sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J)
F.S.KAZI.....
