SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Guj) 683

ASHOKKUMAR C.JOSHI
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
HARPALSINH VIKRAMSINH JADEJA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For The Appellant : MR HARDIK SONI, APP.
For The Respondent: MR KIRTIDEV R DAVE, MR RAHUL K DAVE

JUDGMENT :

1. Present appeal has been filed by the appellant – State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the judgment and order dated 26.02.2010, passed in Special Case No. 89 of 2008 by the learned Special Judge, Kachchh-Bhuj, recording the acquittal.

2. The facts, in brief, are that complainant – Devjibhai Shankarbhai Makwana lodged a complaint before the Kothara Police Station, District: Kachchh-Bhuj against the respondent – Harpalsinh Vikramsinh Jadeja for the offences punishable under Sections 332, 323 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 stating therein that on 19.09.2007 at about 14:30 hours when the complainant, who belongs to the scheduled caste, was at his office, performing his duties as Talati cum Mantri at Vinzan Gram Panchayat, respondent came there and asked the complainant to sign one document possessed by him. He further stated to draw the panchnama as Narmada water pipeline passes through his land and some damage was caused in the land, to which, on the complainant replying that he could not sign the panchnama, the respo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top