IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1214 of 2003 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI ==========================================================

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

STATE OF GUJARAT Versus RAMABHAI JOGDABHAI PARGI & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR RONAK RAVAL, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI Date : 01/12/2025

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 Additional Sessions Judge, Godhra, passed in Sessions Case No.166 of 2002, dated 24.01.2003, acquitting the respondent from the offence under Sections 302, 326, 323 read with Section 34 and Section 114 of the IPC and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, the State has preferred instant appeal under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C.

3. This Court has heard Mr.Ronak Raval, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant – State. Though served, none appears for and on behalf of the respondents – accused.

4. Brief facts giving rise to file the present Appeal are that, three accused were tried and prosecuted for the offence of murder. Deceased Savabhai Parghi was agriculturist and also cultivating the land of the accused which was put on mortgage. Before the incident, there was a dispute with respect to taking crops in the mortgaged land. The accused being an owner of the land intended to take away the crops whereas the complainant party was having strong objection against this. On the next day, the deceased Savabhai, in order to resolve the dispute, went to the house of the accused, situated nearby their house. Again dispute being took place on the issue of crops and heated exchange of words being taken place, as a result, in a heat of passion, the accused Ramabhai heat the head of the deceased by giving stick. Meanwhile, the injured Devabhai and Jayantibhai came to rescue and they were also beaten by accused Mansingh and Lalsingh. The deceased taken to the hospital where he succumbed to injuries. The injured Devabhai was treated as the Civil Hospital. On the basis of FIR, and upon due completion of the investigation, the chargesheet for causing death of Savabhai and grievous injuries to the witnesses, came to be filed.

5. Since the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the Court committed the case to the Sessions Court, who has been culminated into Sessions Case No.166 of 2002.

6. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Godhra framed charges against the accused to which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 7. In the course of trial, the prosecution adduced the following oral as well as documentary evidence in support of its case:

Oral evidence - 7 Documentary evidence - 21

8. On conclusion of oral evidence, the trial Court recorded further statements of the accused as provided under Section 313 of the Code, wherein, they claimed their innocence.

9. The learned Sessions Judge after appreciating and examining the oral as well as documentary evidence acquitted the accused herein for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 326 and 323 of the IPC. However, the accused Ramabhai came to be convicted under Section 302 Part-II of the IPC and sentenced to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment.

10. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this acquittal appeal has been preferred by the State.

11. In the present case, the oral as well as medical evidence having not been challenged or disputed by the other side. Thus, it is proved that the death of Savabhai was homicide in nature. The only issue falls for our consideration is to whether the accused are guilty of offen