Gujarat High Court
Gigabhai Fulabhai Kathechiya T-Koli vs The State Of Gujarat on 15 September, 2025
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/437/2007 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 437 of 2007
==========================================================
GIGABHAI FULABHAI KATHECHIYA T-KOLI & ORS.
Versus
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
ABATED for the Appellant(s) No. 1,3
ADVOCATE NOTICE SERVED for the Appellant(s) No. 2
NON BAILABLE WARRANT SERVED for the Appellant(s) No. 2
MR ROHANKUMAR RAVAL, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 15/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. On service of non-bailable warrant to the
accused-Bijalbhai Talsingbhai Kathechiya T-Koli
has been brought before this Court at 11:00 a.m.
by the Police Japta from Surendranagar Sub-Jail.
The accused-Bijalbhai Talsingbhai Kathechiya T-
Koli informed that he is represented by learned
advocate Mr. Munjal V. Acharya who stated that
he has instructions to appear for the accused.
Let his Vakalatnama be accepted on record.
2. The accused - Bijalbhai Talsingbhai Kathechiya
T-Koli is accompanied with the representatives
of the Village as well as widow of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/437/2007 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
complainant-Manaben Butabhai Kankariya and
nephew-Mavjibhai Polabhai Kankariya. Both of
them have stated that other co-accused have died
and the role of the present appellant - accused
is very nominal and with the intervention of the
villagers and the representatives of the
community, they have decided to settle the
dispute to maintain peace and law and order in
the Village.
3. Manaben Butabhai Kankariya and Mavjibhai
Polabhai Kankariya both have filed their
notarized Settlement Deeds, which are signed by
the witnesses and Rupabhai Kathechiya has
submitted that the Village people have decided
to compensate the family with money and since
the complainant has died, the amount would go to
the widow.
4. Manaben has also produced a copy of the death
certificate of the complainant-Kankariya
Butabhai Varshingbhai who died on 27.12.2024.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/437/2007 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
5. The conviction is under Section 324 IPC against
all three accused. Accused nos.1 and 3 since
deceased, the appeal qua them was abated by an
order dated 26.2.2024. The sentence of
imprisonment under Section 324 read with Section
114 IPC was ordered of two years rigorous
imprisonment. The sentence of imprisonment under
Section 504 read with Section 114 IPC was
ordered of two years rigorous imprisonment and
for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989
(hereinafter referred to as "the Atrocities
Act"), the sentence awarded was five years
rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,500/- and
in default of payment of fine, six months
further imprisonment was ordered by the learned
Special Judge, Fast Track Court, Surendranagar
on 21.2.2007 in Special Case no.73 of 2006.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/437/2007 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
6. Mr. Rohankumar Raval, learned APP has submitted
that though the offence is compoundable, but the
appellant is also convicted under the Atrocities
Act and states that keeping in view the object
of the Atrocities Act, Mr. Raval, learned APP
has submitted that conviction is required to be
upheld.
7. The incident is dated 18.4.2005. The role which
has been attributed to the present appellant-
accused - Bijalbhai Talsingbhai Kathechiya T-
Koli is of beating the complainant with the
stick on the leg. The issue was regarding the
land, which was belonging to the Village trust,
which was between two communities and it was
alleged that keeping the grudge, present
incident has taken place.
8. Section 324 IPC, as it stood prior to
31.12.2009, was compoundable with permission of
the Court and the person who is hurt may
compound the offence. Here the victim
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/437/2007 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
complainant - Kankariya Butabhai Varshingbhai
has died and the heirs have filed the affidavits
stating that it was a dispute between two
communities of the Village and they have
resolved the dispute. Considering the notarized
agreements of settlement filed by Manaben and
Mavjibhai and since Section 324 becomes
compoundable as per the table in sub-section (2)
of Section 320 with the permission of Court and
when Section 504 IPC is also compoundable as per
the table below sub-section (1) of Section 320
without permission of the Court. Hence, in view
of the provision, both the sections are ordered
to be compounded.
9. In the case of Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of
India and Others reported in (2020) 4 SCC 727,
the Hon'ble Supreme Court (Per: Hon'ble Justice
S. Ravindra Bhatt) referred to the judgment
rendered in the case of Raghunathrao Ganpatrao
vs. Union of India, reported in 1993 (1) SCR
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/437/2007 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
480, wherein it has been held as under:-
"In our considered opinion this
argument is misconceived and has no
relevance to the facts of the
present case. One of the objectives
of the Preamble of our Constitution
is 'fraternity assuring the dignity
of the individual and the unity and
integrity of the nation.' It will be
relevant to cite the explanation
given by Dr. Ambedkar for the word
'fraternity' explaining that
'fraternity means a sense of common
brotherhood of all Indians.' In a
country like ours with so many
disruptive forces of regionalism,
communalism and linguism, it is
necessary to emphasis and re-
emphasis that the unity and
integrity of India can be preserved
only by a spirit of brotherhood.
India has one common citizenship and
every citizen should feel that he is
Indian first irrespective of other
basis. In this view, any measure at
bringing about equality should be
welcome."
10. In a similar way, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Nandini Sundar Vs. State of
Chhatisgarh, reported in (2011) 7 SCC 457,
held that:-
"The Constitution itself, in no
uncertain terms, demands that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/437/2007 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
State shall strive, incessantly and
consistently, to promote fraternity
amongst all citizens such that
dignity of every citizen is
protected, nourished and promoted."
11. In the case of Prathvi Raj Chauhan (supra)
while dealing with the constitutional
validity of Section 18A of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989, it was held as
under:-
"12. The Court can, in exceptional
cases, exercise power under Section
482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the cases
to prevent misuse of provisions on
settled parameter, as already
observed while deciding the review
petitions. The legal position is
clear and no argument to the
contrary has been raised."
12. In view of the fact that the compoundable
Sections 324 and 504 IPC has been compounded and
taking into consideration the referred judgments
under the Atrocities Act and with a view to
maintain peace and serenity in the Village, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/437/2007 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
judgment and order of conviction and sentence
dated 21.2.2007 passed by the learned Special
Judge, Fast Track Court no.2, Surendranagar in
Special Case no.73 of 2006 is set aside. The
appellant is acquitted of all the charges. The
appeal is allowed in the above terms.
(GITA GOPI,J)
Maulik
