IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 790 of 2013 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Sd/-

and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS Sd/- ================================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✓

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

STATE OF GUJARAT Versus JAYNARAYAN DAYARAM GUPTA & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ================================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS Date : 20/08/2025

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY)

1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 28.02.2013 passed in Sessions Case No.84 of 2009 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.14, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, whereby the respondents, who are accused no.1 and accused no.2 in the said case, were acquitted of the charges levelled against them for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 332, 323, 353, 427 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “the IPC”) and under Section 85(2)(H) of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act.

2. Briefly stated, it is the case of the prosecution that accused no.1 is the owner of a snack shop which is situated at Saraspur area in Ahmedabad. Accused no.2 is his son. PW-6 is a senior officer working in Sales Tax Department. PW-8 and PW-9 are also the employees working in the Sales Tax Department. It is stated that the Joint Commissioner of the Sales Tax Department has issued orders to PW-6 to verify whether persons, who are doing business in selling goods and selling snacks worth more than 100 rupees, are giving valid bills to the customers or not. So, it is stated that pursuant to the said order of the Joint Commissioner, PW-6 along with PW-8 and PW-9 visited the snack shop of accused no.1 on 15.02.2008 at about 11:30 a.m. They found accused no.2, who is the son of accused no.1 in the said shop. PW-6 purchased snacks worth of Rs.240/- and tendered Rs.300/- and asked for a bill from accused no.2. Then accused no.2 did not give a valid bill, but he has given a chit for Rs.240/-. When PW-6 demanded him to issue bill, he did not give it. So, PW-6 has disclosed his identity as an officer of the Sales Tax Department and demanded him to issue the bill as per the procedure. After knowing the identity of PW-6, accused no.2 has informed about the same to his father, who is accused no.1, over phone. Then accused no.1 reached the shop. When PW-6 demanded him to issue bill and when it was not given, PW-6 stated that a fine will be imposed on accused no.1 for contravention of the procedure. Then an altercation took place between accused nos.1 and 2 on one hand and PW-6, PW-8 and PW-9 on the other hand. It is stated that in the said altercation, accused no.2 slapped PW-6 and accused no.1 caught hold of his neck and strangulated his neck. PW-10 and PW- 11, who are also doing business nearby the shop of accused no.2, also witnessed the incident.

3. After the said assault, PW-6, PW-8 and PW-9 straightaway went to the police station. PW-6 lodged report with the police narrating the above facts. It was not registered as a case immediately. But, on the instructions of the Superior Officer of PW-6, it is stated that the police have registered a case against accused nos.1 and 2. The case was investigated. The scene of offence was observed in the presence of the mediators and a panchnama was prepared. The accused nos.1 and 2 were arrested during the course of investigation in the presence of the mediators. Then the torn shirt of PW-6 was recovered and seized in the presence of the mediators four days after registration of the FIR. After completion of the investigation, police laid the charge-sheet agai