IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1000 of 2008 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER ==========================================================

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

STATE OF GUJARAT Versus JUSAB IBRAHIM TURK ==========================================================

Appearance:

MS MEGHA CHITALIYA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR JAYESH A DAVE(253) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER Date : 06/02/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

1.1 Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal dated 01.12.2007, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Kachchh at Bhuj, in Criminal Appeal No.46 of 2003, for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304(a), 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 134, 177 and 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the appellant – State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Code”).

1.2 The respondent-accused was charged and tried by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mandvi in Criminal Case No.541 of 1999 for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 304(a), 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 134, 177, 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, wherein, at the end of trial, the respondent-accused was convicted and sentenced for simple imprisonment of 6 months and fine of Rs.500/- for the offence punishable under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code and in default thereof, further sentence of 15 days and for the offences punishable under Sections 337, 338 and 304(a) for simple imprisonment of 2 years and fine of Rs.500/- and in default thereof, further sentence of imprisonment of 15 days and fine of Rs.50/- for the offence punishable under the Motor Vehicles Act. The said judgment was challenged before the learned Sessions Court, Bhuj, wherein the impugned judgment of acquittal is passed, by setting aside the order of the learned trial Court.

2. The prosecution case as unfolded during the trial before the trial Court is that on 06.05.1999 at about 6.30 hours, the accused drove the truck bearing No.GJ-12-T-7386 on Shirva road in a rash and negligent manner and dashed with the scooter on which four persons were travelling and thus caused the accident, due to which all the four persons on the scooter lost their lives. Hence, the complaint was filed by the complainant.

3. After investigation, sufficient prima facie evidence was found against the accused person/s and therefore charge- sheet was filed in the competent criminal Court. The competent Court proceeded with the trial wherein many oral and documentary evidence were led and after examining the same, convicted the accused, against which, the accused preferred appeal before the learned Sessions Court and the learned Sessions Court acquitted the accused by setting aside the order of conviction passed by the learned trial Court, as the findings of the learned trial Court were found perverse.

4. Learned APP for the appellant – State has pointed out the facts of the case and having taken this Court through both, oral and documentary evidence, recorded before the learned lower appellate Court, would submit that the learned lower appellate Court has failed to appreciate the evidence in true sense and perspective; and that the learned lower appellate Court has committed error in acquitting the accused. It is submitted that the learned lower appellate Court ought not to have given much emphasis to the contradictions and/or omissions appearing in the evidence and ought to have given weightage to the dots that connect the accused with the offence in question. It is submitted that the learned lower appellate Court has erroneously come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case. It is al