Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 9438
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
NATHUBHAI KACHARABHAI TOLIYA – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 374 of 2008
MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1 BAILABLE WARRANT SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2 NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the lack of evidence to support charges under the Atrocities Act, reaffirming that civil disputes should not be criminalized.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 378(1)(3) - Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Sections 3(1)(4)(5)(15) - Appeal against acquittal - The appeal was filed by the State against the acquittal of the accused for alleged land encroachment and violation of the Atrocities Act - The trial court found insufficient evidence to support the charges and ruled that the matter was essentially civil in nature. (Paras 2, 18, 20)
(B) Acquittal - Principles governing appeals against acquittal - The appellate court should not interfere with the acquittal unless the trial court's decision is perverse or illegal, and if two reasonable conclusions are possible, the one in favor of the accused should prevail. (Paras 6, 8, 20)
Facts of the case:
The complainant alleged that the accused encroached upon land allotted to his father in 1967, leading to a complaint under the Atrocities Act. The trial court found the evidence insufficient to support the claims of encroachment or violation of the Act. (Paras 3, 18)
Findings of Court:
The trial court's acquittal was upheld as the prosecution failed to prove the charges against the accused, and the dispute was deemed civil in nature. (Paras 20)
Issues: The main issues were whether the trial court erred in acquitting the accused and whether the evidence presented warranted a conviction under the Atrocities Act. (Paras 4, 20)
Ratio Decidendi: The appellate court affirmed that the trial court's findings were just and legal, emphasizing that the prosecution did not meet the burden of proof required for the charges under the Atrocities Act. (Paras 20)
Result: Appeal dismissed; acquittal confirmed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. land encroachment dispute (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. prosecution's evidence (Para 4 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. defense's position (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. appeal dismissed (Para 21) |
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr.Dhawan Jayswal, learned A.P.P. appearing for the appellant – State and Mr.Niraj Soni, learned advocate, appointed as amicus curiae under Rule 363 of the Gujarat High Court Rules for the respondents - accused.
2. The present appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 13.04.2007 passed by the learned Presiding OfÏcer, Fast Track Court No.2, Rajkot in Sessions Case No.15 of 2005 whereby, respondents – accused came to be acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(4)(5)(15) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the “Atrocities Act”) read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Brief facts of the case of the prosecution, as narrated by the complainant in his complaint dated 28.04.2000, are that from 08.12.1967, the land bearing survey no.362 paiki admeasuring 8 Acres was given to the father of the complainant from the land no.4964 of the Deputy Collector, Rajkot for agricultural purpose. The said land was registered in the name of Lavjibhai Danabhai Rathod in form no.6 and from 10.07.1991, the said land was cultivated by him. It is the case of the prosecution that the said land was usurped by the respondents – accused and cultivated by them. The owner of the land in question was shown by the complainant with the help of map of the Rajkot District Inspector, Land Records OfÏce. Father of complainant – Danabhai Virabhai got the land for cultivation and the same was shown by him by documentary evidence of the land allotment register and, therefore, the accused persons committed the offence by taking over the land of the complainant and cultivating the same. Therefore, the criminal complaint was registered for the offence punishable under Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(4)(5)(15) of the Atrocities Act. After completion of investigation, recording statements of the relevant witnesses and after drawing necessary panchnama, the police prepared the charge-sheet against the respondents – accused and submitted the same before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot on 16.10.2004. However, as the case was exclusively sessions triable, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot, as per Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, committed the case to the competent Court, which was registered as Atro Sessions Case No.15 of 2005. The accused were given all the police papers. The case was transferred to the competent Court for final disposal.
3.1. At the time of the trial, the prosecution has examined the following witnesses:-
| Particulars | Exhs. |
| Statement of complainant – Lavjibhai Danabhai Rathod | 26 |
| Statement of Raghuvirsinh Sajubha Jadeja | 43 |
| Statement of panch witness Nanjibhai Mavjibhai Sindhav | 56 |
| Statement of surveyor – Rasikbhai Kantibhai Godhani | 58 |
| Statement of Mamlatdar Prakashkumar Mohanbhai Dobaria | 66 |
| Retd. ACP Balvantbhai Mojibhai Asari | 73 |
3.2. The prosecution has also relied upon the following documentary evidences:-
| Particulars | Exhs. |
| Caste certificate | 27 |
| Complaint | 29 |
| Letter received from Rajkot police station regarding Criminal Case No.500/2000 | 30 |
| Letter addressed to the father of the complainant by | 31 |
| the Under Secretary of Governor | |
| Extract of village form no.8 | 32 |
| Order of the Deputy Collector | 33 |
| Revenue record in the name of the father of the complainant | 34 to 40 |
| Form filled up by the complainant regarding land revenue | 40 |
| Letter written to the Minister by the police station | 45 |
| Documents of village form 7/12, 8-A, Hakpatrak no.6 | 46 to 52 |
| Letter written by the Minister to the police station | 53 |
| Panchnama | 57 |
| Letter addressed to the surveyor by his ofÏce | 60 |
| Letter addressed to the District Land Record by the ofÏce of the Police Commissione | |
