Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Ramchandra Chandrapal Yadav on 4 June, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1492/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1492 of 2009
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
RAMCHANDRA CHANDRAPAL YADAV & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS JIRGA JHAVARI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s) No.
1
MR NACHIKET D MEHTA(6529) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No.
1,2,3
UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 04/06/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present acquittal appeal has been filed by the State under Section-378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order dated 06.05.2009 passed by the Court of learned Special and Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara (hereinafter referred to as "the Trial Court") in Special (Ele.) Case No.31 of 2008. By way of the impugned judgment and order, Accused have been acquitted of all the charges levelled against them under Sections-136(1)(A) read with Section 150 of the Electricity Act, 2003. Page 1 of 10 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Fri Jun 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jun 06 23:50:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1492/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/06/2025 undefined
2. The short facts emerging from the record, reads as under:-
2.1. It is the case of prosecution that at relevant point of time, when the complainant - Deputy Engineer was discharging his duties with MGVCL, Karjan, during that period, one sub division and transformer of Gujarat Vij Company of 25 KVA was installed in the field of one Shri Manubhi Patel. It is further the case of the prosecution that prior to 17.03.2008, 120 ltrs. oil of transformer valued at Rs.4800/- as well as 160 kgs. LT HT winding coil valued at Rs.21,400/- has been stolen and accordingly, on 17.03.2008, lineman one Shri. K.R. Patel has drawn necessary panchnama as well prepared map of spot of incident in the presence of Panch Witness then after a police complaint was filed and on the basis of aforesaid complaint, investigation was carried out and offence was registered before MGVCL Police Station, Gotri at Vadodara.
2.2. It is further noted that during watch at Bharuch -
Jadeshwar Road, near Tolnaka, one Esteem Car bearing No.GJ-05-AM-2971 found suspicious and was detained and Page 2 of 10 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Fri Jun 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jun 06 23:50:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1492/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/06/2025 undefined checked. However, the driver of the car ran away from the spot of incident, whereas three persons caught red handed with muddamal. It is further the case of prosecution that during search, muddamal which was stolen, was found from trunk of the car detained and accordingly, an offence under Section 41(1)(d) was registered against respondents accused and intimation was given to MGVCI Police Station, Gotri. Vadodara.
2.3. The police recorded statement of witnesses and as there was sufficient evidence connecting respondents with crime, charge-sheet came to be filed before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karjan and the same was committed to the Court of learned Special and Addl. Sessions Vadodara.
3. The prosecution led following oral and documentary evidences in support of it's case and to bring home the charges against Accused persons.
Oral Evidences of Prosecution
Sr. No. Name and Particulars Exh.
1. Satishkumar Kantilal Suthar, Deputy 9
Engineer, Complainant
2. Kanubhai Ratilal Patel 13
Page 3 of 10
Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Fri Jun 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jun 06 23:50:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1492/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/06/2025
undefined
3. Dolatsinh Khumansinh Chauhan 14
4. Police Constable Manilal Muljibhai 16
5. Ganpatbhai Ambubhai B.N.1604 17
6. Unarmed Head Constable Thakorbhai 18
Ranchhodbhai
7. Rathava Aarmbhai Aapsigbhai 20
8. Joravarsinh Vitthalbhai Brahmbhatt 23
9. Rakesh Shankarbhai Vasava 27
(Panchsahed)
10. Manafkhan Ibrahimkhan Pathan 29
(S.O.G. Bharuch)
Documentary Evidences
Sr.No. Document Particulars Exh.
1. Complaint 10
2. Panchnama of scene of offence 12
3. Map of scene of offence 11
4. Panchnama of Aluminum Wire 28
5. Telephonic message send to the officer 30
6. Panchnama of Maruti Esteem Car 24
7. Physical Panchnama of Accused 25
8. Panchnama of scene of offence 26
4. After conducting the Trial and appreciating the evidence on record, the Trial Court has found that prosecution has failed to establish the case and not able to prove the charges beyond doubt, thereby acquitted the Accused from all the charges levelled against them.
5. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms.Jirga Jhaveri for Appellant - State.
Page 4 of 10 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Fri Jun 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jun 06 23:50:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1492/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/06/2025 undefined 5.1. Learned APP Ms.Jirga Jhaveri would submit that Trial Court has committed a serious error of law by acquitting accused in a case where the charges are successfully proved by prosecution against them. It is further submitted that goods which were stolen were recovered from accused and recovery of stolen goods has been proved on record, there was no reason for the Trial Court to give any benefit of doubt in favour of accused.
5.2. Learned APP would further submit that merely because driver of the Maruti Esteem Car ran away from the spot would not give any benefit of doubt to the accused so far as in relation to commission of crime is concerned. It is further submitted that merely some minor contradiction in complaint as well as Panchnama in relation to the actual stolen goods would not mean that there was no theft of article belongs to Electricity Company.
6. Before dealing with merit of the appeal, at this stage, I would first like to remind myself the position of law propounded by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and Others vs. State of Karnataka [(2024) 8 SCC 149] has held as under: Page 5 of 10 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Fri Jun 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jun 06 23:50:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1492/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/06/2025 undefined "39. This Court in the case of Rajesh Prasadv.
State of Bihar and Another, (2022) 3 SCC 471 encapsulated the legal position covering the field after considering variousearlier judgments and held as below: -
"29. After referring to a catena of judgments, this Court culled out the following general principles regarding the powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal in the following words: (Chandrappa case [ Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415 ] " 42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:
(1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
(2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law.
(3) Various expressions, such as, "substantial and compelling reasons", "good and sufficient grounds", "very strong circumstances", "distorted conclusions", "glaring mistakes", etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal.
Such phraseologies are more in the nature of "flourishes of language" to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.
Page 6 of 10 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Fri Jun 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jun 06 23:50:02 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1492/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/06/2025 undefined (4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the Trial Court.
(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court."
40. Further, in the case of H.D. Sundara & Ors. v. State of Karnataka, (2023) 9 SCC 581 this Court summarized the principles governing the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of CrPC as follows: -
"8.1.The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the presumption of innocence; 8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;
8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after re- appreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the Trial Court is a possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;
8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was Page 7 of 10 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Fri Jun 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jun 06 23:50:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1492/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/06/2025 undefined also possible; and 8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible."
41. Thus, it is beyond the pale of doubt that the scope of interference by an appellate Court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:-
41.1 That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity; 41.2 That the same misreading/omission to evidence on record; is based on a consider material 41.3 That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record.
42. The appellate Court, in order to interfere with the judgment of acquittal would have to record pertinent findings on the above factors if it is inclined to reverse the judgment of acquittal rendered by the Trial Court."
7. At the outset, it is required to be taken note of the fact that a crucial witness who ought to have been examined by the prosecution is Manubhai Shankarbhai Patel from whose farm goods were stolen i.e. transformer, but, surprisingly, he was not being examined by prosecution. So, factum of alleged theft of transformer, its coil and oil are not successfully Page 8 of 10 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Fri Jun 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jun 06 23:50:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1492/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/06/2025 undefined proved by prosecution.
7.1. It is further noticed that alleged transformer which was stolen from the farm of said Manubhai though recovered from Maruti Esteem Car wherein presence of accused were found which is confirmed from Panchnama, but, prosecution has failed to establish one crucial fact that such recovery of stolen articles were in a conscious possession of all the three accused.
7.2. Nothing on record except recovery of goods from car whereby it can be proved beyond doubt that accused have in fact either stolen or purchased the stolen goods as the case may be and having its conscious possession. Further, driver of Esteem car ran away at the time of interception by police personnel whereby it has not came on record as to whether stolen articles recovered were in fact carried at the instance of the accused or the driver of Maruti Esteem car as the case may be.
7.3. These are the glaring defects remain on the part of the prosecution which resulted into weakening its case and ultimately resulted into granting benefit of doubt to accused, Page 9 of 10 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Fri Jun 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jun 06 23:50:02 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1492/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/06/2025 undefined consequently given acquittal by the Trial Court.
8. Thus, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, even after independently re-appreciating the evidence on record, I am of the view that observations, reasons and findings so recorded by Trial Court is neither perverse nor erroneous and in any case not contrary to settled principle of law thereby no interference is required by this Court while exercising its appellate powers under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
9. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. Resultantly, the impugned judgment and order of the Trial Court is hereby confirmed. Bail bond, if any, shall stand cancelled. Record and proceedings, if called for, be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J) Bhoomi Page 10 of 10 Uploaded by BHOOMI YOGESHKUMAR MISTRY(HC01557) on Fri Jun 06 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Jun 06 23:50:02 IST 2025