Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 4677
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
A.J.DESAI, A.S. SUPEHIA, JJ
Bhabhlu Naajbhai Dhadhal – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 609 of 2016|R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 739 of 2016|CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE) NO. 1 of 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Yogesh Lakhani, Mr. Dhruvin Bhuptani, Mr. Ruturaj Nanavaty
For the Respondents: Mr. Dharmesh Devnani
Convictions cannot stand without reliable identification of accused, particularly without a Test Identification Parade, raising reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 148, 224, 225, 302, 307, 324, 325, 326, 332, 333, 397, and 398 read with Section 149 - Challenge to conviction in multiple offences resulting from violent altercation involving police officers - Conviction set aside on grounds of insufficient identification of accused and lack of direct evidence linking them to the crimes. (Paras 1-9)
(B) Conviction Procedure - The prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and identification without a Test Identification Parade raises serious doubts about reliability. (Paras 5.1 and 8.3)
Facts of the case:
Appellants convicted for their involvement in the violent incident on 18th April 2001, resulting in the deaths of two police officers and individuals from the accused side. The appellants' claims were based on lack of direct identification by witnesses.
Findings of Court:
The court ruled that the prosecution failed to establish a conclusive link between the accused and the charges, leading to reasonable doubts.
Issues: The primary issue was the identification of the accused and the evidentiary failures of the prosecution, particularly the absence of a Test Identification Parade.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that mere recovery of weapons and other circumstantial evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction; the prosecution must provide reliable witness identifications.
Result: Appeals allowed; convictions reversed and sentences set aside.
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI)
[1.0] By way of present Criminal Appeals under Section 374 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , the appellants herein – original
accused have challenged the judgment and award dated
12.02.2016 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge,
Amreli in Sessions Case No.294/2001, whereby the appellants have
been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 147 ,
148, 224, 225, 302, 307, 324, 325, 326, 332, 333, 397 and 398
read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter
referred to as “ IPC ”) and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment
for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149
of the IPC ; rigorous imprisonment of 10 years for the offence
punishable under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the IPC
with fine of Rs.2000/ and in default of payment of fine to undergo
further simple imprisonment for one year; rigorous imprisonment
of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 147 of the IPC
with fine of Rs.500/ and in default of payment of fine to undergo
further simple imprisonment for 10 days; rigorous imprisonment
of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 148 of the IPC
with fine of Rs.1000/ and in default of payment of fine to undergo
further simple imprisonment for 4 months; rigorous imprisonment
of 2 years for the offence punishable under Section 224 read with
Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.1000/ and in default of
payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 4
months; rigorous imprisonment of 2 years for the offence
punishable under Section 225 read with Section 149 of the IPC
with fine of Rs.1000/ and in default of payment of fine to undergo
Page 2 of 21
further simple imprisonment for 4 months; rigorous imprisonment
of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with
Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.2000/ and in default of
payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 6
months; rigorous imprisonment of 3 years for the offence
punishable under Section 325 read with Section 149 of the IPC
with fine of Rs.2000/ and in default of payment of fine to undergo
further simple imprisonment for 6 months; rigorous imprisonment
of 10 years for the offence punishable under Section 326 read with
Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.2000/ and in default of
payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 6
months; rigorous imprisonment of 3 years for the offence
punishable under Section 332 read with Section 149 of the IPC
with fine of Rs.2000/ and in default of payment of fine to undergo
further simple imprisonment for 6 months;rigorous imprisonment
of 3 years for the offence punishable under Section 333 read with
Section 149 of the IPC with fine of Rs.2000/ and in default of
payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for 6
months; rigorous imprisonment of 7 years for the offence
punishable under Section 397 read with Section 149 of the IPC and
rigorous imprisonment of 7 years for the offence punishable under
Section 398 read with Section 149 of the IPC . Criminal Appeal
came to be admitted on 15.06.2016 and Criminal Appeal
No.739/2016 came to be admitted on 04.07.2016. Record and
Proceedings were sent by the trial Court alongwith the paperbook.
[2.0] In all 10 persons were prosecuted for the offences punishable
under Sections 147 , 148, 149, 302, 307, 332, 333, 324, 325, 326,
Page 3 of 21
224, 225, 397 and 398 of the IPC and Section 135 of the Gujarat
Police Act by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Amreli in
Sessions Case No.294/2001. During the pendency of trial, accused
No.5 – Vikrambhai Bhagubhai Patgir and accused No.9 – Harjit
Pithabhai Helaiya expired and therefore, the trial proceeded against
rest of the 8 accused. On the date of judgment, accused No.3 –
Khodubhai Babubha
