State of Gujarat vs Ragunath Viramji Marwadi

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Guj) 223

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Vipul M. Pancholi, Hemant M. Prachchhak, JJ.
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Ragunath Viramji Marwadi & others – Respondents
R/Criminal Appeal No. 389 of 1995
Decided On : 21-02-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Chintan Dave APP
For the Respondent: Mr. Mrudul M Barot

Headnote:
Acquittal - Indian Penal Code - Section 143, 147, 148, 149 r/w. Section 307 - Section 135(1) r/w. Section 120 of Bombay Police Act
Fact of the Case:

The appellant, State of Gujarat, appealed against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court in a case involving charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Bombay Police Act. The accused were acquitted based on the prosecution's failure to establish the charges.
Finding of the Court:

The Trial Court acquitted the accused due to inconsistencies in the evidence and the failure of the prosecution to establish a motive and the involvement of the accused. The High Court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for compelling reasons to overturn an acquittal.
Issues: Inconsistencies in evidence, failure to establish motive, and involvement of the accused
Ratio Decidendi: The appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal unless the findings of the trial court are perverse, contrary to the evidence, or demonstrably unsustainable. The prosecution must establish the circumstances of the case and exclude every possible hypothesis except the guilt of the accused.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment and order of acquittal by the Trial Court were confirmed. Bail bonds, if any, were cancelled, and the record and proceedings were directed to be transmitted back to the Trial Court.

JUDGMENT :

Hemant M. Prachchhak, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal dated 30.06.1994 passed by the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No.20, Ahmedabad (hereinafter be referred to as “the Trial Court) in Sessions Case No.295 of 1989, whereby the accused – respondents herein came to be acquitted from the charge of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149 r/w. Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “the IPC”) and under Section 135(1) r/w. Section 120 of Bombay Police Act, the appellant – State of Gujarat has preferred present criminal appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Code”).

2. Briefly stated that on 02.09.1987 at about 1.15 p.m. in the open place near Samteshwar Temple situated Near Law Garden, Ahmedabad, the accused along with other persons formed unlawful assembly with a common object to kill Mohanji Ganeshji, the complainant and further common object of the above assembly, accused Nos.1 and 2 were armed with iron pipes, accused Bhavarlal Ragunath, who died subsequently, armed with razor and used force and accused No.1 inflicted a blow with iron pipe on the back of Mohanji Ganeshji and accused No.2 inflicted pipe blows on the head of Mohanji Ganeshji and deceased Bhavarlal Ragunath had inflicted a blow by a razor on the face of Mohanji Ganeshji, as a result of which said Mohanji Ganeshji sustained injuries.

3. During the course of the trial, accused Bhavarlal Ragunath was expired on 18.04.1994 and the trial qua accused Bhavarlal Ragunath came to be abated.

4. On completion of the investigation, investigating agency recorded statements of the prosecution witnesses, drawn panchanama and collected relevant expert evidence for the purpose of proving the offence. After having found sufficient material against the respondents herein for the aforesaid offence, charge-sheet came to be filed in the concerned Court of JMFC. Since the case was exclusively triable by Sessions Court, concerned JMFC committed the case to the Sessions Court as provided under section 209 of the Code.

5. Upon committal of the case to the Sessions Court learned Sessions Judge framed charge at Exhibit 2 against the accused - respondents herein for the aforesaid offence. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. In order to bring home charge, the prosecution has examined 12 prosecution witnesses and also produced documentary evidence before the learned trial Court, which is as under :-

Oral evidence:

Sr.No.	Name of the witnesses	Exhibit
1	Mohanji Ganeshji Marwadi-complainant and eye witness	22
2	Dinesh Mohanji Marwadi-child witness	24
3	Otiben Mohanji Marwadi-wife of the complainant	25
4	Hansaji Maganji-eye witness	26
5	Gopalbhai Joitharam Bhavsar-panch	28
6	Nimesh Jitubhai Laheri-panch	58
7	Bachugiri Kalyangiri-police inspector	59
8	Ramsinh Somabhai Chauhan-police officer	60
9	Dr. Hasmukhbhai B. Vora-doctor who treated the complainant	64
10	Mangilal Buthaji Marwadi-panch	67
11	Kashinath Balaji Kharat-PSI	68
12	Amthabhai Manekbhai Desai-PI	74

Documentary evidence :

Sr.No.	Documents
1	Complaint of Mohanji Ganeshji Marwadi
2	Police report
3	Seizure panchnama of the shirt and vest worn by the complainant
4	Panchnama of the scene of offence
5	Panchnama of confiscation of weapons
6	Seizure panchnama of the pant worn by the complainant
7	Medical certificate of the complainant
8	Medical certificate of the complainant

7. On conclusion of evidence on the part of the prosecution, the trial Court recorded further statements of respondents as provided under Section 313 of the Code, wherein, the respondents herein denied their involvement in the offence and stated that fa