Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
GITA GOPI
Koyjibhai Himmatbhai Tadvi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
GITA GOPI, J.
1. The present Criminal Appeal is under Section 351 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) against the judgment and order of conviction dated 16.09.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Atrocity Case No.24 of 1998 whereby both the appellants who were the complainant and witnesses in the trial came to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 344 of the Cr.P.C. allegedly for giving false evidence.
2. During the course of this appeal, the appellant No.1- Koyjibhai Himmatbhai died on 01.06.2016 who was the original complainant in the Atrocity case, and by an order dated 26.08.2025, the appeal qua appellant no.1 came to be abated. So now, the challenge to the judgment and order of conviction is by appellant no.2- Lakshmanbhai Koyjibhai Tadvi, a witness during the trial.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Shailesh C. Parikh by referring to the impugned order submitted that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Vadodara on 16.09.2004 had passed the order acquitting 25 accused of Atrocity Case No.24 of 1998 considering them as innocent, while the complainant, i.e. the deceased appellant and the pre
The court emphasizes the necessity for adherence to mandatory procedural safeguards in summary trials for false evidence to ensure fairness and uphold the principle of natural justice.
The court emphasized the necessity of following established procedures in trials for perjury, ruling that failure to do so results in an unfair conviction.
The court ruled that mere inconsistencies in testimony do not constitute perjury under Section 344 Cr.P.C. unless there is evidence of wilful intent to give false evidence.
Provisions of Section 303 of the Cr.P.C. gives right to any person accused of an offence before a criminal Court to be defended by a pleader of his choice. The provisions of Section 304 of the Code o....
The court emphasized that additional evidence under Section 391 of the Cr.P.C. must not prejudice the accused and should only be admitted if necessary to prevent a failure of justice.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
