Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1485

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J. C. Doshi, J.
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Bhamvarsinh Vajesinh Purohit & Anr. – Respondents
R/Criminal Appeal No. 1002 of 2010
Decided On : 05-07-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Public Prosecutor
For the Respondent: Aditya A Choksi, HCLS Committee, Mr KV Shelat

In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court must respect the trial court's findings unless they are found to be perverse, as presumption of innocence is reinforced by an acquittal.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378(1)(3) - Indian Penal Code - Sections 323, 504, 506(2) - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(i)(x) - Appeal against acquittal - Trial court acquitted the accused citing lack of evidence beyond reasonable doubt; prosecution witnesses failed to provide corroborative testimony - Acquittal upheld as there were no satisfactory grounds to displace trial court's findings regarding evidence credibility and absence of intent - Presumption of innocence remains in favor of the accused. (Paras 1, 19, 25)

Table of Content
1. overview of the case and allegations. (Para 1 , 2 , 4)
2. arguments presented by both parties. (Para 5 , 6)
3. court analysis of evidence and testimony. (Para 8 , 10 , 14 , 16)
4. legal provisions and precedents regarding acquittals. (Para 18 , 23 , 24)
5. standard of proof and principles in acquittal appeals. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
6. final dismissal of the criminal appeal. (Para 26)

ORDER :

J. C. Doshi, J.

1. The State has preferred this appeal under Section 378 (1) (3) of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.), challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 06.04.2010 passed by the learned 3^rd Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Surat, in Special Atrocity Case No.29 of 2008, acquitting the accused Bhamvarsinh Vajesinh Rajput in the offence under Sections 323 , 504, 506(2) of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (for short “IPC”) along with Section 3(i)(x) of the Schedule Casts and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “Atrocity Act”).

2. For convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their original status as complainant and accused.

3. By order dated 20.11.2024, this court has joined the original complainant Thakorbhai Vanjibhai Chaudhari as party respondent to the present appeal. Mr. Aditya Choksi, learned advocate, pursuant to service of process to original complainant, remain to represent him.

4. Brief facts for preferring the present appeal are as under:

4.1. FIR bearing CR. No.II-50/2008 filed by the complainant Thakorbhai Vanjibhai Chaudhari with Mangrol Police Station, District-Surat on 29.09.2008 with the allegation that around 02:30 pm. complainant and witness Jagubhai Chaudhari went to the ofÏce of the accused situated near Jalaram cold drinks to execute registered sale deed for purchase of plot, but the accused has denied to execute sale deed and spoken in insulting language in public to the complainant and as well as by telling subsequent words intentionally, knowing fully well that the complainant and witness are the members of the Schedule Casts and Schedule Tribes community and beat with the mobile phone which is in his arm at the face and forehead of the complainant and also gave threat to kill the complainant.

4.2 This alleged incident has been recorded in the FIR for the offence punishable under Section 323 , 504, 506(2) of the IPC along with Section 3(i)(x) of the Atrocity Act. Investigating ofÏcer carried out usual investigation and found sufÏcient material to place the accused to trial before the Special Court.

4.3. Learned Trial Court after considering the case and hearing both sides, framed charge at Exh.9 against the accused. In plea, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, hence, the special case was rested for production of prosecution evidence.

4.4. In order to bring home charge against accused, the prosecution has examined following oral as well as documentary evidence.

Oral Evidence

Sr No.	Name of Person	Particular	Exhibit
1	Dahyabhai Mansukhbhai Makwana.	Witness	11
2	Jagubhai Bhagiyabhai Chaudhari.	Witness	12
3	Satishbhai Damodarbhai Nayak.	Witness	13
4	Bharatbhai Kikabhai Gamit.	Panch	14
5	Jitendrabhai Naginbhai Chaudhari.	Panch	16
6	Thakorbhai Valjibhai Chaudhari.	Complainant	17
7	Dr. Bipinkumar Ramnandsing.	Doctor	22
8	Sanmukhbhai Somabhai Vasava.	Panch	24
9	Hasmukhbhai Sultanbhai Ninama.	Investigating OfÏcer	27

Documentary Evidence

Sr No.	Particular	Exhibit
1	Panchnama of the spot of incident.	15
2	Complaint.	18
3	Treatment / injury certificate of the complainant.	23
4	Arrest Panchnama of the accused.	25
5	Cast certificate of the complainant.	28
6	Address proof of the accused.	29
7	Income and cast certificate of the accused.	30
8	Suchipatra.	31

4.5 At the end of the prosecution’s evidence, learned Trial Court has recorded further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., whereby accused denied the incriminating evidence against him and submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. Argument from learned advocates for both the side was heard.

4.6. After