R/CR.A/203/2007 JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 203 of 2007

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT

================================================================

1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to

see the judgment ?

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the

judgment ?

4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law

as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any

order made thereunder ?

================================================================

THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Versus

HARSUKH BHIKHABHAI RATHOD

================================================================

Appearance:

MR RUTVIZ OZA APP(2) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1

HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

MR PRATIK B BAROT(3711) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

RICHA SHAH(7541) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2,3,4,5

================================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT

Date : 21/04/2018

ORAL JUDGMENT

1.

The State has preferred this appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of

the Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment and order dated

30.10.2006 rendered by the learned Second Fast Track Judge,

Junagadh, in Special Atrocity Case No.29 of 2006. The said case was

Page 1 of 7

R/CR.A/203/2007 JUDGMENT

registered against the present respondents original accused for the

offence under Sections 323, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code

and also under Section 3 (1) (10) of the Scheduled Castes and the

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (herein after referred

to as Atrocities Act).

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the complainant Jayaben

Praveenbhai Chudasama, who belongs to Vankar Harijan community

filed complaint by alleging that on 23.02.2006 at about 7:00 p.m.,

while she was coming out of the house of Lakhubhai after buying

milk, said Lakhubhai, Hansaben and Jayben - wife of Bhanjibhai were

standing on road and they halted the complainant and started

scolding her that why she was talking ill about them. Thereafter, the

complainant answered that she had never talked ill about them and

thereupon Hansaben started abusing the complainant about her

caste and giving kicks and fists blows. Thereafter, all the

respondents accused came there and supported Hansaben to beat

the complainant. Meanwhile, the son of the complainant came there

and subsequently, he was also beaten by the accused. On these

facts, the complaint was filed with the police. The police after

investigation charge sheeted the accused for the aforesaid offences.

The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be

tried.

3.

In order to bring home the charges against the accused

person, prosecution has examined 10 witnesses and also produced

several documents in evidence.

4.

Thereafter, after filing closing pursis by the prosecution,

further statements of accused person under Section 313 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded. The accused denied the

Page 2 of 7

R/CR.A/203/2007 JUDGMENT

case of the prosecution and submitted that a false case is filed

against them.

5.

At the conclusion of trial and after appreciating the oral as

well as documentary evidence, the learned Judge vide impugned

Judgment, acquitted the respondents-accused for the offence .

6.

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment

and order of acquittal dated 30.11.2006 rendered by the learned

Second Fast Track Judge, Junagadh, in Special Atrocity Case No.29

of 2006, t