IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 359 of 2008 With R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 785 of 2007 With R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 356 of 2008 With R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 357 of 2008 With R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 361 of 2008 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Sd/-

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

Approved for Reporting Yes No √

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

STATE OF GUJARAT Versus YOGRAJSINH PRABHATSINH CHUDASMA & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MS.C.M.SHAH, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1 ABATED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2 MR PRATIK Y JASANI(5325) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 4,5 MR RAXIT J DHOLAKIA(3709) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 6,7,8 RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,3 ========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Date : 24/03/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Since all the present criminal appeals arise out of the same judgment and order and involve common questions of fact and law, they are heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

1.1. An offence was registered at Jamnagar Panchkoshi ‘A’ Division Police Station, Jamnagar on 25.05.2004, and after investigation, the Investigating Officer filed in all four charge sheets against the accused detailed as under:

1.2. The learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.4, Jamnagar (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) tried all the cases together as they were arising out of the same FIR and delivered a common judgment in all cases.

1.3. In the impugned judgment, the learned Trial Court referred to the accused in Special Case No. 7 of 2004 as the accused nos. 1 to 8, the accused in Special Case No. 2 of 2005 as the accused No. 9, the accused in Sessions Case No. 4 of 2006 as the accused no.10 and the accused in Sessions Case No. 44 of 2006 as the accused nos.11 and 12 respectively. The appellants and the respondents, who were the original accused before the learned Trial Court are hereinafter referred to as the “accused” in the rank and file referred to in the impugned judgment for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

1.4. During the pendency of these criminal appeals, the original accused no.2 Sultanbhai Hasambhai Sumra expired on 14.01.2020, original accused no.5 Velubha Jivubha Zala expired on 09.10.2024, original accused no.6 Aamadbhai Mamadbhai Dhunda expired on 20.12.2011 and original accused no.11 Anwarsha @ Anusha or Nano Bapudi Son of Mamadsha Aamadsha Banwa Fakir expired on 08.04.2012, and hence, the criminal appeals qua the above referred original accused, who have expired, have become infructuous and have been disposed of accordingly.

2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:

2.1. The accused no.1 was a Driver Police Head Constable at the M.T. Branch, Police Headquarters, the accused no.2 was an Assistant Sub Inspector, the accused no. 3 was a Police Head Constable and the accused nos. 4 and 5 were Police Constables and all the accused nos.1 to 5 were posted at Police Headquarters, Jamnagar and were Public Servants. The accused nos. 9 to 12 and one Rafiq @ Raflo @ Bapudi Mamadsha Fakir were under-trial prisoners lodged in District Jail, Jamnagar and their trials were pending before the Additional Sessions Judge and Fast Track Court No.15, Ahemdabad (Rural) at Navarangpura. The accused nos.9, 11 and Rafiq @ Raflo @

Bapudi Mamadsha Fakir were under-trial prisoners of Sessions Case No.183 of 2003 and the accused nos. 10 and 12 were the under-trial prisoners of Sessions Case No.179 of 2000 both the sessions cases arising out of the FIR registered at Dhanduka Police Station 1-C.R. No.168 of 2000 for the offence under Sections 302, 324, 147, 148, 149, 323, 504 of the IPC and Section 25(1)(B) of the Arms Act,. The accused nos.9 to 12 and accused Rafiq @ Raflo @ Bapudi Mamadsh