Gujarat High Court
Jagubhai Devayatbhai Khachar vs State Of Gujarat on 25 September, 2025
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2334/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2334 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Sd/-
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
================================================================
JAGUBHAI DEVAYATBHAI KHACHAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR PRAVIN GONDALIYA(1974) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS MONALI BHATT, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN G VAHELA for the ORIGINAL COMPLAINANT
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 25/09/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal challenges the judgment and order
dated 28.08.2008 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge (F.T.C. No.3), Bhavnagar, Camp at
Botad in Special Atrocity Case No.31 of 2007.
2. Learned advocate for the appellant Mr. Pravin
Gondaliya submitted that the conviction was under
Section 323, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2334/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/09/2025
undefined
(IPC) and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 (hereinafter referred to in short as 'the Atrocities
Act'). It is further submitted that the issue was with
regard to a trivial issue and the parties have settled the
dispute.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Rohan G. Vaghela has submitted
that he has instructions to appear for the original
complainant and has produced the Affidavit of the
original complainant. Let the Vakalatnama of Mr.
Rohan G. Vaghela be taken on record.
4. The affidavit of the original complainant-Dilipbhai
Dahyabhai Godavariya has been notarised and it has
been stated that because of the intervention of the
members of the family, community members and
society and by mutual understanding and agreement,
they have settled their grievances and now propose to
compound the offences.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2334/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/09/2025
undefined
5. The complainant is present before this Court today
and he confirms the affidavit filed by him. Learned
advocate Mr. Rohan G. Vaghela identifies the
complainant. The above affidavit is supported with a
copy of the Aadhar Card of the complainant. The
Affidavit is ordered to be taken on record.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that
the parties would have the authority to compound the
offences, i.e. Sections 323, 504 and 506(2) of IPC
since the complaint is dated 07.05.2007. It is
submitted that the object of the Atrocities Act is to
protect the members of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes and thus, for the purpose of
protecting the purpose and object of the Atrocities Act,
the settlement should not be considered and the
conviction be upheld.
7. In the case of Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2334/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/09/2025
undefined
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 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."
8. 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 State shall strive, incessantly and consistently, to
promote fraternity amongst all citizens such that dignity of
every citizen is protected, nourished and promoted."
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2334/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/09/2025
undefined
9. 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."
10. Sections 323, 504 and 506(2) of IPC were made
compoundable without the permission of the Court.
Under the provision of Section 320 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to in
short as 'Cr.P.C.') as it stood prior to 31.12.2009, as
the Sections would fall under Table 1 appended to
sub-section (1) of Section 320 of Cr.P.C. where
permission of Court was not necessary against the
person where the offences would be compounded.
11. In view of the provisions of the Atrocities Act and
as the complainant has prayed for compounding of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/2334/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/09/2025
undefined
offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and
506(2) of IPC and when the complainant has already
compounded the offences under IPC, taking into
consideration the principles laid down in the above
referred judgments with regard to the Atrocities Act,
the conviction and sentence is set aside. The
judgment and order dated 28.08.2008 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C. No.3),
Bhavnagar, Camp at Botad in Special Atrocity Case
No.31 of 2007 is set aside. The appellant is acquitted
of all the charges levelled against him. Bail bond
stands discharged. Record and proceedings, if any, be
sent to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI, J)
CAROLINE / DB # 34
