Back
2024 Supreme(Guj) 2033
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.
THE STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
RAMSING JESINGBHAI CHAVDA – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 489 of 2007
Decided On : 07-10-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MEGHA CHITALIYA
For the Respondents: K.K. MAGHNANI, VYAS, ASHISH M. DAGLI, JAGDHISH SATAPARA, K.B. MAGHNANI
The appellate court upheld the presumption of innocence and confirmed the acquittal, stating the prosecution failed to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378 - Appeal against acquittal - The State of Gujarat challenged the acquittal of the accused by the Trial Court, which found insufficient evidence to support the prosecution's case. The court emphasized the presumption of innocence and the need for compelling reasons to overturn an acquittal. (Paras 20-24)
(B) Acquittal - Principles governing appellate review - The appellate court has the power to review and reappraise evidence but must respect the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings unless they are perverse or unsupported by evidence. (Paras 20-39)
Facts of the case:
The accused were acquitted of charges related to assault, kidnapping, and atrocities against the complainant's brother, stemming from a loan dispute. The prosecution's evidence was deemed insufficient. (Paras 1-9)
Findings of Court:
The Trial Court's judgment was upheld, confirming that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. (Paras 24-25)
Issues: The main issues included the adequacy of evidence supporting the prosecution's claims and the validity of the Trial Court's acquittal. (Paras 10-12)
Ratio Decidendi: The appellate court reiterated that an acquittal should not be disturbed unless the trial court's findings are manifestly erroneous or unsupported by evidence. (Paras 20-39)
Result: Appeal dismissed; the acquittal was confirmed.
JUDGMENT :
HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.
1. Present appeal under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by the appellant-State of Gujarat challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 22.12.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge (Atrocity), Fast Track Court N.1, Dhrangadhra (hereinafter referred to as “the Trial Court” for short) in Special Case No. 25 of 2004 whereby the Trial Court has acquitted the accused from the charges levelled against them.
2. Brief facts of the present case are that on 06.04.2004 at about 12.00 p.m., the accused came to the house of the complainant and knocked the door and, thereafter they forcefully opened the door and entered into the house of the complainant and asked about Parsottambhai, the brother of the complainant. That brother of the complainant i.e. Parsottambhai had taken some loan from the accused and had not returned the same and, therefore, the assailants came to the house of the complainant and assaulted on Parsottambhai by the respective weapons and upon intervention by the complainant and his mother, they have sustained injuries in the scuffle. It is the case of the prosecution that the scuffle took place in the house of the complainant and, thereafter, the accused kidnapped Parsottambhai and have looted gold and silver ornaments and they have also insulted by their caste and community and used flimsy words and, therefore, the incident has taken place.
3. A complaint came to be registered as C.R. No. I-10/2004 at Dasada Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 147, 148, 149, 365, 452, 427 etc of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. During the investigation, the accused was arrested.
4. After completion of investigation, as the sufficient evidence was found, the police has arrested the accused and has filed the charge-sheet against the accused before the Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Patadi wherein it was registered as Criminal Case No. 379 of 2004. As the offence was triable by the Court of Sessions, the Judicial Magistrate (First Class) has committed the case under Section 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code to the Court of Sessions wherein it has been registered as Special Case No. 25 of 2004.
5. The charge against the accused came to be framed by the learned Presiding Officer and Special Judge vide Exhibit 7 for the aforesaid offences. On being explained it to them, the accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and pleaded for trial. Hence, the case was tried by the learned Presiding Officer and Special Judge.
6. It appears from the records that the prosecution has examined the following witnesses:
| PW-1 | Isubsha Chandsha | Exhibit 16 |
| PW-2 | Bhandas Keshavdas | Exhibit 18 |
| PW-3 | Govabhai Gandabhai | Exhibit 19 |
| PW-4 | Popatjibhai Ranaji | Exhibit 21 |
| PW-5 | Yunusbhai Anvarbhai Mirza | Exhibit 22 |
| PW-6 | Saidubhai Alibhai | Exhibit 24 |
| PW-7 | Rupeshkumar Karmanbhai | Exhibit 27 |
| PW-8 | Moghiben Karmanbhai | Exhibit 29 |
| PW-9 | Karmanbhai Nanjibhai | Exhibit 30 |
| PW-10 | Parsottambhai Karmanbhai | Exhibit 36 |
| PW-11 | Samuben Kuberbhai | Exhibit 37 |
| PW-12 | Santokben Ramjibhai Parmar | Exhibit 38 |
| PW-13 | Girishbhai Kuberbhai Parmar | Exhibit 39 |
| PW-14 | Gopalbhai Somabhai Makwana | Exhibit 40 |
| PW-15 | Mahendrasinh Anopsinh Jhala | Exhibit 48 |
| PW-16 | Prabhatsinh Velubha Jadeja | Exhibit 49 |
| PW-17 | Gulam Mayuddin Umarmiya Kazi | Exhibit 50 |
7. In addition to this, the prosecution has also produced the following documentary evidence:
| S. No. | Particular | Exhibit |
| 1 | Panchnama of the arrest | 17 |
| 2 | Panchnama of the scene of offence | |
