Reserved On : 11/03/2026 Pronounced On : 17/03/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1241 of 2008 ==========================================================

STATE OF GUJARAT Versus HITESHBHAI JESINGBHAI PATEL & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR KASHYAP R JOSHI(2133) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No.

1,2,3,4,5,6 NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 7 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER

CAV JUDGMENT

1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal dated 13.04.2007, passed by the learned Special Judge, Bharuch, Camp at Ankleshwar, in Special (Atrocity) Case No.25 of 2006, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 178, 149, 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(5)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the appellant – State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Code”).

2. The prosecution case, as unfolded during the trial before the Sessions Court, is that on 28.08.2005 or thereabout, while the complainant was standing with his friend viz., Hemant Balu Patel and was gossiping, at that time, accused Nos.1 and 2 came, quarreled and exchanged heat words with Hemant, but the complainant was standing nearby and did not speak anything, even though the accused told something unpleasant to the complainant; and that on 28.08.2005 at about 9:30 p.m.,while the complainant was going to gym and reached there and due to some reason, standing outside the gym, at that time, he found that Hitesh Patel was armed with a handle of spade Navin Patel was armed with baseball bat and accused No.3 was also armed with a handle of spade; and that out of them, Navin Patel, who was armed with baseball, gave a blow on his head and was bleeding, whereas accused No.3 was giving constant blows on the backside of the complainant with a handle of spade and at the same time, accused Nos.4 and 5 came to the spot and caught hold of neck of the complainant and gave kick and fist blows; and that while beating the complainant, the accused was abusing the complainant; and that as the complainant was shouting, Balu Chiman Patel, Sonu Gupta and Savant Patel had rushed to the spot and accused had run away, but the complainant was doubting that muddamal possessing with him which were taken away by the accused. Therefore, the complaint was filed against the respondent/s-accused.

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 for the offences as alleged. Since the offence alleged against the accused person/s was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court where it came to be registered as Special (Atrocity) Case No.25 of 2006. The charge was framed against the accused person/s. The accused pleaded not guilty and came to be tried.

4. In order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has examined 16 witnesses and also produced 22 documentary evidence before the trial Court, which are described in the impugned judgment.

5. After hearing both the parties and after analysis of evidence adduced by the prosecution, the learned trial Judge acquitted the accused for the offences for which they were charged, by holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.

6. 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 trial Court, would submit that the learned trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence in true sense and perspective; and that the trial Court has committ