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

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ILESH J. VORA, HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, JJ.
State of Gujarat - Appellant
Versus
Thakor Chanduji Manaji and Another - Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 76, 247, 249 of 2012
Decided On : 27-02-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Rohan Shah, Chirag Patel
For the Respondent: Rohan Shah

The court modified the conviction of the accused from attempted murder to causing grievous hurt, emphasizing the need for direct evidence in serious charges.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code - Section 307 - Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(x) - Conviction and sentencing of accused for attempted murder and atrocity - Accused No.1 convicted and sentenced to five years imprisonment for attempted murder and six months for atrocity; acquittal of other accused upheld - Court found insufficient evidence to support conviction of acquitted accused - Appeal by State for enhancement of sentence and against acquittal dismissed. (Paras 1, 2, 20)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378 - Appeal against acquittal - State's appeal against acquittal of accused No.2 and 3 dismissed due to lack of evidence - Court emphasized the need for direct evidence in cases of serious charges. (Paras 2, 10)

Facts of the case:
The incident occurred on 28.06.2010, where accused No.1 inflicted a blow on the forehead of the complainant after a verbal altercation regarding teasing. The trial court convicted accused No.1 and acquitted the others due to insufficient evidence. (Paras 4, 4.1, 4.4)

Findings of Court:
The trial court's conviction of accused No.1 was upheld, but the conviction under Section 307 was modified to Section 325 due to the nature of injuries. (Paras 19, 20)

Issues: The main issues included the adequacy of evidence against the acquitted accused and the appropriateness of the sentence for accused No.1. (Paras 10, 20)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the evidence presented did not sufficiently establish the involvement of the acquitted accused, and the conviction of accused No.1 was modified based on the nature of the injuries inflicted. (Paras 19, 20)

Result: Appeals dismissed; conviction modified.

Table of Content
1. incident details and fir (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
2. prosecution's argument on acquittal (Para 10)
3. defense's argument on conviction (Para 11 , 12 , 13)
4. court's consideration of evidence (Para 14 , 15 , 16)

JUDGMENT :

HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.

1. These three appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 06.01.2012 passed by the learned Special Judge, (Atrocity), Mehsana (hereinafter be referred to as “the Trial Court”) in Special Atrocity Case No.10 of 2011 whereby the Trial Court has convicted the original accused No.1 - Thakor Lalji @ Lalo Chaturji and imposed sentence to undergo simple imprisonment of five years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment of six months for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter be referred to as “the IPC”) and also imposed sentence to undergo simple imprisonment of six months and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo three months imprisonment for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter be referred to as “the Atrocity Act”) and acquitted original accused No.1 – Thakor Chanduji Manaji from the charges levelled against him for the offence under Section 326, 504, 114 of the IPC and under Section 3(2)(v) of the Atrocity Act and original accused No.2 – Thakor Chanduji Manaji and original accused No.3 – Thakor Balvantji @ Lalaji Chanduji from the charges levelled against them for the offence under Section 307, 326, 504 and 114 of the IPC and under Section 3(1)(x), 3(2)(v) of the Atrocity Act.

2. Criminal Appeal No.249 of 2012 has been filed by the State of Gujarat under Section 378 (1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court acquitting the accused No.2 and 3. Criminal Appeal No.247 of 2012 has been filed by the State of Gujarat for enhancement of the punishment imposed on original accused No.1. Criminal Appeal No.79 of 2012 has been filed by the convict – accused No.1 – Thakor Lalaji @ Lalo Chaturji assailing the judgment and order of conviction.

3. As all these criminal appeals having been arisen from the same judgment and order, all these appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

4. Brief facts of the prosecution case is that on 28.06.2010 at about 20.00 hours, accused No.1 teased niece of one Sikandarkumar and while prosecution witnesses were passing through maholla of accused No.1 and as he was standing near the house, the prosecution witnesses have discussed with accused No.2 and 3 and scolded accused No.1. It is the case of the prosecution that accused No.1 got excited and taken dharia from his house and inflicted on forehead of Sikandarkumar. It is also the case of the prosecution that at the time of incident, accused No.2 has brought dhoka from his house and accused No.2 and 3 in abatement of each other gave filthy abuses to the complainant.

4.1 On the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant, the First Information Report (FIR) being C.R.No.I- 102 of 2010 came to be registered with Unjha Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 326, 504, 114 of the IPC and under Section 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(v) of the Atrocity Act.

4.2 After completion of investigation, as the sufficient evidence was found, the police has arrested the accused and have filed the charge-sheet against the accused before the Chief Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Unjha wherein it was registered as Criminal Case No.10 of 2011. 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 where it has been registered as Special Atrocity Case No.10 of 2011.

4.3 On the basis of the material available on record, the trial court ha

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 Back to top