SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 12742

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
IJV, RTV
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
RAMANBHAI VALABHAI MACHHAR – Respondent



Petitioner Advocates:PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) ,Respondent Advocate:HL PATEL ADVOCATES(2034)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1938 of 2004 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA Sd/-

and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI Sd/-

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

Approved for Reporting Yes No No ==========================================================

STATE OF GUJARAT Versus RAMANBHAI VALABHAI MACHHAR & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR RONAK RAVAL, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR MHARSHI PATEL, ADVOCATE for HL PATEL ADVOCATES(2034) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No.

1,11,2,3,4,5,6,7,9 NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 8 UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 10 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI Date : 25/11/2025

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)

1. Here is the Appeal by the State against the judgment and order of acquittal.

2. Being dissatisfied by the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Godhra at Panchmahal, passed in Sessions Case No.67 of 2003 and 10 of 2004, dated 17.08.2004, acquitting the respondent from the offence under Section 395, 436, 435, 427, 295, 120(B) of the IPC, the State has preferred instant appeal under Section

378 of the Cr.P.C.

3. This Court has heard Mr.Ronak B. Raval, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.Maharshi Patel for H.L.Patel Advocates, for the respective parties.

4. Brief facts giving rise to file the present Appeal are that, this case was the output of post Godhra riots that took place in village Santrampur, Dist.Panchmahal. The Godhra train burning case occurred on the morning of 27.02.2002, wherein 59 pilgrims and Kar Sevaks returning from Ayodhya were killed in fire inside Sabarmati Express near Godhra Railway Station, as a result, severe violence took place in Gujarat as well as in the area of Dist.Panchmahal. The people in mass armed with deadly weapons, put on fire the houses, vehicles and commercial premises which led to large number of communal violence. It is in this background facts, on 01.03.2002, at about 10:00 p.m. the respondent accused and other around 1000 people, formed an unlawful assembly and the object of the assembly was to commit a mischief by fire with an intention to cause the destruction of the buildings and to commit a robbery of the movable and immovable property belongs to minority community. They entered into area known as Navi Vasahat where both the communities have their residence and after pelting stones, they sat the vehicles, houses, business premises on fire and looted household things and other valuables whereby caused a considerable damages to the property. The local police immediately rushed to the place and open fire for disruption, meanwhile, the persons who had suffered, managed to escape and went to city area of Santrampur. According to survey, 39 homes set on fire, and the amount of robbery comes in the lakhs of rupees. PW-1 Habibsha Fakir after three days of incident, lodged an FIR with the Santrampur Police Station for the commission of the offences under Sections 395, 436, 435, 427, 295 read with Section 120(B) of the IPC, inter alia alleging that the respondent accused along with mob of around 1000 people, caused damages to their property by setting them on fire and committed an offence of robbery. The offence came to be registered as I-C.R.No.39 of 2002. The accused respondents were arrested. After due investigation and upon filing of the charge-sheet, the case was committed to the court of Sessions at Godhra.

5. Since the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the Court committed the case to the Sessions Court, which has been culminated into Sessions Case No.67 of 2003 and 10 of 2004.

6. The learned Sessions Judge, Godhra framed charges against the accused to which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

7. In

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top