2000 Supreme(Guj) 487
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :H.H.MEHTA
ABEDINBHAI TURABBHAI - Appellant
Versus
CHHAGANBHAI DEVABHAI BHARWAD - Respondent
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION161 of 1989
Decided On : 06/23/2000
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 401 read with Section 397 - Criminal Revision Application filed alleging the order of partly conviction and partly acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge - Held, It is a well settled principle of law that in Criminal Revision Application evidence appreciated by the trial Court cannot be reappreciated - Still however, Court has gone through the evidence of each witness in between the lines and Court is satisfied that the learned Judge of the trial Court has rightly and justly came to the conclusion that said witnesses are not believable and their evidence does not inspire the confidence and therefore he has rightly discarded the evidence of the prosecution - He has taken into consideration the evidence of the prosecution on the point of injuries sustained by the accused also and he has come to the conclusion that accused have probablised their case of self-defence - Considering the evidence of prosecution, no other conclusion other than the conclusion arrived at by the trial Court can be arrived at by this Court - When the powers of this Court in Criminal Revision Application are circumscribed, limited to examine the judgement of the trial Court on the point of error of law, Court is of the opinion that the learned Judge of the trial Court has not committed any error on the point of law as a result of which it can be said that there is a flagrant miscarriage of justice - Application dismissed. (Paras 30, 31)
( 1 ) THIS is a Criminal Revision Application filed under Section 401 read with Section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, (for short, Cr. PC) filed by original complainant of Sessions Case No. 112 of 1987 challenging the order of partly conviction and partly acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Mr F. R. Makwana), Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur (who will be referred to hereinafter as "the learned trial Judge") by rendering his judgement exh. 88 dated 30th January 1989 in Sessions Case No. 112 of 1987 which was pending on his file.
( 2 ) DURING the pendency of this Criminal Revision Application, on 10. 3. 2000 it was submitted by Mr H. K. Parmar that Revision-Opponents Nos. 9, 15 and 18 have died and therefore vide order dated 10. 3. 2000 this Criminal Revision Application is abated against Revision Opponents Nos. 9, 15 and 18.
( 3 ) HERE in this present matter the Revision Petitioner was original complainant who lodged a complaint in Dholka Police Station and on the basis of that complaint the investigation was conducted and ultimately charge sheet was filed against Revision Opponents Nos. 1 to 18 in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dholka, and therefore the Revision Opponents Nos. 1 to 18 were accused before the Court of the learned JMFC, Dholka, who ultimately committed the case to the Sessions Court, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur and therefore for the sake of convenience the parties will be referred to hereinafter as the complainant and the accused.
( 4 ) THE facts leading to this Criminal Revision Application in a nutshell are as follows:-
( 5 ) THE case of the complainant as per the complaint at Exh. 65 dated 5. 3. 1987 lodged by original complainant i. e. Revision-Petitioner Abedinbhai Turabhai Vahora, resident of village Virdi, Taluka Dholka, District Ahmedabad, is as follows: the complainant is having his agricultural land admeasuring about 60 vighas in village Virdi and he is doing agricultural work in that land. Since about 15 years before the date of the complaint Kasambhai Yusubbhai (deceased who was the uncle of the complainat) was the Sarpanch of that village. One another field of Ibrahimbhai Hasanbhai is also situated on the outskirts of village Virdi. Sarpanch Kasambhai had taken that land of Ibrahimbhai Hasambhai for cultivating the crop of wheat on share basis.
( 6 ) ON or about 5th March 1987 at about 9 AM Mohsinbhai Kasambhai (accused no. 7) along with 7-8 labourers had gone to that field of Ibrahim Hasanbhai. The complainant had also gone to his field which is known as "khijadiyawala field" for agricultural work at about 9. 15 AM and at that time the labourers were cutting the crop of wheat. At that time one Kalu Mohan, (accused no. 7) had come with his two cows and other cattle were following said Kalu Mohan. It is the case of prosecution that said Kalu Mohan, accused no. 7, had allowed his cattle to graze in the field in which there was a crop of wheat of Sarpanch. Therefore, Mohsinbhai (PW No. 11) asked Kalu Mohan to take out his cows from the field. Thereupon Kalu Mohan was enraged and he spoke filthy language, by giving abuses and gave a stick blow on the back of said Mohsin. At that time the complainant was watching that incident from his field known as Khijadiyawala field. Mohsinbhai under fear ran away from his place and he went to village and he returned with his father to that place. After arrival of Sarpanch Kasambhai, he also asked that Kalu Mohan to take out cattle from the field. In the meanwhile other shepherds, Chhagan Deva, accused no. 1, Dhara Kachra, accused no. 4, Maman Bhara, accused no. 3, Naku Bhikha, accused no. 2, Mera Bhikha, accused no. 16, Jeevan Kachra, accused no. 6, Kala Kachra, accused no. 11, Bapu Bhura, Hari Bhara, accused no. 8, and other 15-20 shepherds of village had come with their cattle to that place. Deceased Kasambhai and his son Mohsin asked all those shepherds to take out their cattle from the field. The comp