Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Ajay @ Harisinh Kevalsinh Thakur on 6 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/339/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 339 of 2013
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
AJAY @ HARISINH KEVALSINH THAKUR & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS KRINA CALLA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR. DEVENDRA G RANA(6997) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
Date : 06/10/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH
ROY)
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated
16/10/2012 passed in Sessions Case No.147 of 2012 on the file
of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad City
whereby respondent nos.1 and 2 herein were acquitted of the
charges punishable under Sections 302, 394 and 398 of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/339/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
Indian Penal Code.
2. Facts of the prosecution case lie in a narrow compass
and may be sated as follows:
2.1. On 13/11/2006, the mother of the de-facto complainant
by name Vinaben (hereinafter called as the deceased) was in
the kitchen room of her house at about 12:00 noon. At that
time, some unknown persons gained entrance into the house
and entered the kitchen room of the house and they all caught
hold of her and one person among them has cut the throat of
the deceased with a knife while others caught hold of her and
thereafter all of them have taken away her Gold Bangles and
Gold Chain and left the house. The deceased has fallen on the
ground in the kitchen and she was lying in a pool of blood.
Her husband and her son went out on some work and she was
alone in the house at that time. After her husband and her
son who is the de-facto complainant returned home, they
found the deceased in a pool of blood in the kitchen room of
their house. They found one knife with blood stains by the
side of the dead body. The son of the deceased who is
examined as PW-3 lodged a report with the police stating that
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/339/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
some unknown persons entered their house while her mother
was alone in the house and they killed her by cutting her
throat with a knife and stolen her Gold Bangles and Gold
Chain. The said report was registered as a crime for the
aforesaid offences. The case was investigated. The knife at
the scene of offence was seized by the police in presence of
the mediators. It was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory
(FSL). They opined that human blood was found on the knife
which is of "B" group which matches with the blood group of
the deceased.
2.2. Thereafter, inspite of efforts made by the Investigating
Officer, the identity of the culprits could not be traced. Long
time thereafter i.e. in the year 2010 after four years, on
15/08/2010, A-1 was arrested in connection with other similar
crimes. During the course of interrogation, he confessed that
he committed the present crime also in the year 2006. His
custody was obtained by way of obtaining the PT warrant
against him. It is stated that he has led the police along with
another set of mediators to the scene of offence in the present
case and has shown the house of the de-facto complainant
saying that they have committed the present crime in the said
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/339/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
house. It is further stated that A-1 also disclosed the name of
A-2 for the co-accused who perpetrated the said crime along
with him. So, they arrested A-2 also on 28/08/2010.
3. Thereafter the police laid charge sheet against A-1 and
A-2 for the aforesaid offences.
4. In the trial court, after the accused made their
appearance, charges under Sections 302, 394 and 398 of the
Indian Penal Code were framed against them. They denied
the said charges and claimed to be tried.
5. In the trial that took place, the prosecution got examined
PW-1 to PW-11 witnesses and got marked fifteen documents
to prove its case against the accused.
6. At the conclusion of the trial, after considering the
evidence on record and on appreciation of the same, the trial
court found the accused not guilty for any of the charges
levelled against them and acquitted them of the said charges
by the impugned judgment.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/339/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
7. Therefore, aggrieved by the impugned judgment of
acquittal, the State has preferred the present appeal assailing
the legality and validity of the said judgment.
8. When the appeal came up for hearing before this Court,
we have heard learned APP Ms. Krina Calla for the State and
learned counsel Mr.Devendra G. Rana for respondent no.2.
Despite service of notice on respondent no.1, he did not
appear. Inspite of affording several opportunities to him in
this old appeal of the year 2013, he did not turn up for
hearing. Therefore, the appeal is being disposed of after
hearing learned APP and learned counsel for respondent no.2
and after perusing the record and proceedings and the
evidence on record.
9. As can be seen from the evidence on record, there is no
direct evidence available for the prosecution to prove the
identity of the culprits who committed the said offence of
murder and the theft of Gold Bangles and Gold Chain. The
case is purely based on circumstantial evidence. PW-3 who is
the de-facto complainant is not aware of the identity of the
culprits who perpetrated the crime. He does not even know
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/339/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
the names of the persons who committed the crime. As he
and his father went out on some personal work, the deceased
was alone in the house and at that time the offence took place.
So, there is nobody in the house to witness the crime even
though the crime took place during the day time at 12:00
noon on the date of offence. In the FIR that was lodged by
PW-3, he has stated that some unknown persons trespassed
into their house and committed the crime. Even the police
could not trace the culprits and they could not identify them
for a period of four years. After lapse of four years period of
time, in the year 2010, A-1 was arrested in connection with
some other similar crimes. So, the police have obtained the
PT warrant and took him into their custody and when they
interrogated, it is stated that he disclosed that he has
committed the present crime also along with A-2 and another
and that he has led the police and the mediator examined as
PW-7 to the house of the de-facto complainant and shown it to
the police and stated that they have committed the crime in
the said house. So, on the basis of the said statement of A-1
himself, he was arrested in connection with the present crime.
On the basis of his statement, they have also arrested A-2 on
20/08/2010.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/339/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
10. Basically the said statement said to have been given by
A-1 before the police amounts to giving confession regarding
commission of the said crime before the police. So, it is hit by
Section 24 and Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act and it is
not admissible in evidence. It cannot be used as valid
evidence against the accused for the purpose of holding them
guilty of committing the present offence and to convict them.
11. Even though the knife was recovered at the scene of
offence and blood group of the deceased was found on the
said knife as per the FSL report, it is of no use to the
prosecution to prove its case against the accused. The knife
was not recovered at the instance of A-1 and A-2. So, it
cannot be connected to the crime said to have been
committed by A-1 and A-2. The knife was not sent to
fingerprint expert to find out whether there are any
fingerprints of A-1 or A-2 so as to connect the said knife to the
accused to prove that they have committed the said crime.
So, mere recovery of knife at the scene of offence which is
available at that place is of no use to the prosecution to prove
the case against the accused. The gold ornaments i.e. the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/339/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
Bangles and the Chain said to have been robbed by the
accused are not recovered either from the accused or at their
instance from any other place. Even till today, the said gold
ornaments are not recovered by the police.
12. The mediator relating to recovery of knife at the scene of
offence did not support the prosecution case and he turned
hostile.
13. Even though the mediator examined to prove the facts
that the accused led the police and the mediator to the scene
of offence by A-1 has supported the prosecution case only to
some extent. His evidence was not believed by the trial court
in view of the inherent infirmities found in his evidence. We
do not find any legal flaw in said finding of the trial court in
disbelieving his evidence. Even otherwise as already noticed
supra, the said statement of A-1 amounts to confession and it
is not admissible in evidence.
14. Therefore, there is absolutely no incriminating evidence
available either against A-1 and A-2 in the present case to
prove their complicity in commission of the offence beyond all
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/339/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
reasonable doubt with acceptable legal evidence.
15. There is a clear lapse and failure on the part of the
police in properly investigating the crime and to trace the real
culprits and to collect adequate legal evidence to prove the
case against the accused.
16. Therefore, there is not even an iota of evidence available
against the accused to prove their guilt as per the allegations
ascribed by the prosecution. The trial court after considering
the said evidence and on proper appreciation of the same
arrived at a right conclusion and acquitted the accused. We
do not find any legal flaw or infirmity in the said judgment of
acquittal. After considering the evidence on record and on
reappraisal of the same, we do not find any semblance of
evidence against the accused to hold them guilty for the
charges levelled against them. Therefore, the impugned
judgment of acquittal of the trial court is perfectly sustainable
under law and it calls for no interference in this appeal. So,
the appeal fails and is liable to be dismissed.
17. In fine, the appeal is dismissed confirming the judgment
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/339/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/10/2025
undefined
of the trial court. Bail bond of the accused, if any, shall stand
discharged.
18. Record and proceedings be sent back forthwith to the
concerned court.
(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J)
(D. M. VYAS, J)
ILA
