Gujarat High Court
Popatbhai @ Shakabhai Bhanabhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 26 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 1052 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting No
==========================================================
POPATBHAI @ SHAKABHAI BHANABHAI VALODARA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. S. L. PATEL(8520) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR. PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 26/06/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appeal is filed by the appellant - original
complainant under Section 14A of the Schedule Caste and
Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against
the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned
12th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot (hereinafter referred
to as "the learned Trial Court") in Atrocity Case No. 12/2022
on 03.01.2025, whereby, the learned Trial Court has
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under
Sections 504, 506(2), 447, 427 and 114 of IPC and Section
3(1)(r)(s) and Section 3(2)(5-A) of Schedule Caste and
Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
(hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short).
1.1 The respondent nos. 2 to 5 are hereinafter referred to
as "the accused" in the rank and file as they 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 - Popat @ Shakabhai Bhanabhai
Valodara was at his hut on 18.01.2022 and at around 08.00
to 08.30 am, the accused armed with an axe came to his
plot and abused him and hurled caste slurs against him
and and threatened him and broke his hut and caused a
loss of Rs. 4000/- to him. The complainant filed the
complaint at Jasdan Police Station under Sections 504,
506(2), 447, 427 and 114 of IPC, Section 135 of the Gujarat
Police Act and Section 3(1)(r)(s) and Section 3(2)(5-A) of the
Atrocities Act which was registered at I - C.R. No.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
11213021220055/2022.
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, Jasdan and as the said offences
against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of
Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court,
Rajkot as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of
Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Atrocity
Case No. 12/2022.
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. A charge at Exh. 16 was framed against the
accused and the statements of the accused was recorded at
Exhs. 17 to 20, wherein, the accused denied the contents of
the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was
taken on record.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
2.4 The prosecution produced the following evidence to
bring home the charge against the accused.
ORAL EVIDENCE
Sr. No. PW Name of the witness Exh.
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Sr. No. Particulars Exh.
2.5 After the learned APP filed the closing pursis, the
further statements of the accused under Section 313 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded, wherein,
the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on
record. The accused refused to step into the witness box or
examine witnesses on their behalf and stated that a false
case has been filed against them. After the arguments of the
learned APP and the learned advocate for the accused were
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
heard, the learned Trial Court by the impugned judgement
and order was pleased to acquit all the accused from the
charges levelled against them.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said
judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant 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 respondents. The case has been proved beyond
reasonable doubt and the prosecution has successfully
established the case against the respondents 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 respondents 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
4. Heard learned advocate Mr. S.L. Patel for the appellant
State and learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat for the
respondent State. Perused the impugned judgement and
order of acquittal and have reappreciated the entire
evidence of the prosecution on record of the case.
5. Learned advocate Mr. S.L. Patel 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 advocate has
urged this Court to quash and set aside the same and find
the respondent guilty for the offences.
5.1 Learned APP Mr. Pranav Dhagat has submitted tjhat
the learned Trial Court has appreciated the evidence and
passed the impugned judgement and order and no
interference is required hence, the appeal may be rejected.
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 regarding the scope of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
interference in acquittal appeals in the case of Chandrappa
& Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka reported in 2007 (4) SCC
415, wherein, the Apex Court has observed as under:
Recently, in Kallu Vs. State of M.P. (2006) 10 SCC 313, 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 decision of the trial
court".
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;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
(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 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
by the trial court.
7. 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.
8. In light of the above settled principle of law, the
evidence of the prosecution is dissected and the
prosecution has examined PW1 - Popatbhai Bhanabhai
Valodara at Exh. 27 and the witness has stated that the
accused had come on 18.01.2022 and had broken his hut
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
and threatened him and told him to go away from there and
hence, he went away. At that time, the neighbours came
and separated them and he had filed the complaint which
is produced at Exh. 28. The witness has produced his caste
certificate at Exh. 29 and has stated that he does not know
who assaulted him and has not identified the accused
before the learned Trial Court. The witness has not
supported the case of the prosecution and has been
declared hostile and has been cross-examined at length by
the learned APP. During the cross-examination by the
learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated
that he was residing with the accused at Vadod village and
he had gone to the Police Station once. The plot is not in his
ownership but is a government land and he does not have
any evidence that the plot is in his ownership. That he had
placed construction material and spade and axe in the plot
and if he files a case under the Atrocity Act, he is given
financial support by the Government.
8.1 The prosecution has examined PW2 - Pratipalsinh
Ajitsinh Zala at Exh. 30 and the witness is the Investigating
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
Officer who has narrated in detail the procedure
undertaken by him during investigation. The witness has
produced the panchnama of place of offence at Exh. 33 and
the arrest panchnama at Exh. 34.
9. One minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the
prosecution, as per the complaint, the incident has
occurred on 18.01.2022 between 08.00 - 08.30 am when
the accused came with Hero Deluxe Motorcycle No. GJ-3-
KM-6356 and Bajaj Discover Motorcycle No. GJ-3-EH-7153
and they assaulted the complainant. As per the say of the
complainant, the neighbours came and saved him but the
complainant himself has not supported the case of the
prosecution and has been declared hostile. In the cross-
examination, the complainant has stated that he is known
to the accused as they are residing in the same village for
many years but the complainant has not identified the
accused or the persons who has assaulted him before the
learned Trial Court. There are no eyewitnesses to the
incident who have been examined and the panchnamas
have directly been produced in the deposition of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
Investigating Officer. There are no panch witnesses
examined and the contents of the complaint have not been
proved in the evidence of the complainant.
10. In view of the settled position of law in the decisions of
Chandrappa (supra), 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1052/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 26/06/2025
undefined
11. The impugned judgement and order of acquittal
passed by the learned 12 th Additional Sessions Judge,
Rajkot in Atrocity Case No. 12/2022 on 03.01.2025, is
hereby confirmed and the case is dismissed at the stage of
admission and disposed of accordingly.
12. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings
be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J)
VASIM S. SAIYED
