Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Aher Somatbhai Ramabhai (Since ... on 6 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 411 of 2011
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
AHER SOMATBHAI RAMABHAI (SINCE DECEASED, ABATED) & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. C.M. SHAH, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
ABATED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
BAILABLE WARRANT SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No.
2,3,4,5
MR CHINTAN S POPAT(5004) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No.
2,3,4,5
UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 6
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 06/08/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appeal is filed by the appellant State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Veraval (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Atro Sessions Case No. 4/2006 on 22.12.2010, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable Page 1 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 504, 325 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(10) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Atrocity Act" for short).
1.1 During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent no. 1 has expired and the appeal qua the respondent no. 1 is disposed of as infructuous.
1.2 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as "the accused" in the rank and file as they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:
2.1 On 30.10.1999 at around 00.30 hours, the accused formed an unlawful assembly and armed themselves with weapons like sticks and iron pipes and came to the field of the complainant and assaulted the complainant and other witnesses. The complainant sustained fractures on her hands and the other witnesses too sustained injuries and the complainant - Maniben Sida Rama Harijan Vankar filed Page 2 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined a complaint at Prabhaspatan Police Station under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act which came to be registered at Prabhaspatan Police Station I - C.R. No. 0173/1999.
2.2 The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and after completion of investigation, a charge-
sheet came to be filed before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Veraval and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Veraval as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Atro Sessions Case No. 4/2006 on 22.12.2010. 2.3 The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code. A charge at Exh. 1 was framed against the Page 3 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined accused and the statement of the accused was recorded at Exh. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 wherein, the accused denied the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.
2.4 The prosecution examined 16 witnesses and produced 24 documentary evidences on record in support of their case and after the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed the closing pursis, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded and after the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned Trial Court by the impugned judgement and order was pleased to acquit all the accused from the charges levelled against them.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law and evidence on record and the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the fact that all the Page 4 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and during the cross-examination, nothing adverse has been elicited in favor of the respondent. The case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt and the prosecution has successfully established the case against the respondents and the judgment and order of acquittal is unwarranted, illegal, and without any basis in the eyes of the law and the reasons stated while acquitting the respondents are improper, perverse and bad in law. Hence the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court deserves to be quashed and set aside.
4. Heard learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the appellant State and learned advocate Mr. Divyang Joshi for learned advocate Mr. Chintant Popat for the respondent nos. 2 to 5. Perused the impugned judgement and order of acquittal and have reappreciated the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of the case.
5. Learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah has taken this Court through the entire evidence of the prosecution on record of Page 5 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined the case and submitted that the complainant has fully supported the facts of his complaint. The impugned judgement and order is perverse and learned APP has urged this Court to quash and set aside the same and find the respondent guilty for the offences.
5.1 Learned advocate Mr. Divyang Joshi for learned advocate Mr. Chintant Popat for the respondent nos. 2 to 5 has submitted that the learned Trial Court has appreciated the evidence and passed the impugned judgement and order and no interference is required hence, the appeal may be rejected.
6. At the outset, before discussing the facts of the present case, it would be appropriate to refer to the observations of the Apex Court regarding the scope of interference in acquittal appeals in the case of Chandrappa & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka reported in 2007 (4) SCC 415, wherein, the Apex Court has observed as under:
Recently, in Kallu Vs. State of M.P. (2006) 10 SCC 313, this Court stated:
"While deciding an appeal against acquittal, the power of the Appellate Court is no less than the power exercised while Page 6 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined hearing appeals against conviction. In both types of appeals, the power exists to review the entire evidence. However, one significant difference is that an order of acquittal will not be interfered with, by an appellate court, where the judgment of the trial court is based on evidence and the view taken is reasonable and plausible. It will not reverse the decision of the trial court merely because a different view is possible. The appellate court will also bear in mind that there is a presumption of innocence in favour of the accused and the accused is entitled to get the benefit of any doubt. Further if it decides to interfere, it should assign reasons for differing with the decision of the trial court".
From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of 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 Code of Criminal Procedure, 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 Page 7 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined extensive powers of an appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of 'flourishes of language' to emphasize 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. (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 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.
7. The law with regard to acquittal appeals is well crystallized and in acquittal appeals, there is presumption of innocence in favour of the accused and it has finally culminated when a case ends in an acquittal. The learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence and when the learned Trial Court has come to a conclusion that the Page 8 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubts, the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused gets strengthened. There is no inhibition to re appreciate the evidence by the Appellate Court but if after re appreciation, the view taken by the learned Trial Court was a possible view, there is no reason for the Appellate Court to interfere in the same.
8. To bring home the charge against the accused, the prosecution has examined PW1 - Daiben wife of Ramabhai at Exh. 12 and she is the sister-in-law of the complainant Maniben Sida Rama. The witness has supported the case of the prosecution and has produced her caste certificate at Exh. 16. The witness has stated that after the incident, they were taken to the Government Hospital at Prabhaspatan and thereafter to the hospital at Veraval. The witness has identified the sticks before the learned Trial Court. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has admitted that there is a dispute regarding the land with the accused and the accused and his family are living at Inaj village which is Page 9 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined at a distance of about 2.5 to 3 kms and there is only a small road to approach the place of incident. There are no lights at the place of incident and after the incident, they had gone to the field of Masribhai and the police had arrived at about around 01.00 pm. The police inquired from her, Maniben, Bhupatbhai and Chandubhai and once again in the morning two policemen came took them to the hospital. The sticks that she has identified is normally carried by farmers in the area.
8.1 PW2 - Chandubhai Devabhai examined at Exh. 18 is also an injured victim and has supported the case of the prosecution and during the cross-examination, he has admitted that he resides at Sangadhra village and the place of incident is a public road without lights and hence, one cannot identify a person standing on the road. The witness did not have an occasion to meet the accused at any time prior to the incident and did not know them prior to the incident. There are a number of fields surrounding the place of incident and before the Medical Officer, he has not named any of the accused.
Page 10 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined 8.2 PW3 - Dr. Rameshkumar Arjanbhai Muchhadiya examined at Exh. 20 is the Medical Officer who was on duty on 30.10.1999 at General Hospital, Junagadh. The witness has stated that at around 09.15 pm, Maliben Sidabhai resident of village Chamoda was brought for treatment with a refer chit of General Hospital, Veraval. In the history, she has stated that she was assaulted with sticks and pipes by Somat Rama and Puna Somat and on examination, she had an abrasion 4 cm x 4 cm on right forearm, tenderness on right forearm, bruise 1 cm x 4 cm on left lateral thigh/ red to brown color and a bruise 7 cm x 3 cm on left gluteal region which was oblique and brown. As per the history, there was a fracture in the right radius. The patient was admitted as an indoor patient in the female ward on 30.10.1999 and was discharged on 01.11.1999. As per the opinion of the Medical Officer, the injuries were likely to be caused by hard and blunt substance and would take about six to eight weeks to heal if no complications arise. During the cross-examination, the witness has stated that he had only given primary treatment to the patient and a fracture Page 11 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined injury could be caused by fall or dash against the wall. Besides the fracture, the other injuries were simple and an abrasion could be sustained if a person dashes with some hard substance.
8.3 PW4 - Dr. Rameshgiri Mohangiri Meghnath examined at Exh. 25 is a Medical Officer at Prabhatpatan Government Hospital and he has stated that on 30.10.1999 at around 12.30 am, Maliben Sidabhai Ramabhai Jadav had come for treatment with Police Constable - Govindbhai Virabhai, Buckle No. 1738. The patient had given a history of assault by Samatbhai by delivery on 30.10.1999 at about 12.30 am. On examination, there was a swelling on the dorsum of right hand above the 3 cm x 3 cm and 1 cm abrasion on the right hand with tenderness, a transverse contusion on lateral side of left thigh 4 cm x 2 cm, transverse contusion on lateral side of left thigh 2 cm x 2 cm and tenderness on the right shoulder. The patient was given primary treatment and referred to the orthopedic surgeon and the witness has produced to Medical Certificate at Exh. 26. On the same day, Daiben Dhanabhai Devshi was also brought for Page 12 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined treatment at about 6.00 pm and she had given a history of alleged assault by Samatbhai by a delivery on 30.10.1999 at 12.30 am. On examination, the patient had tenderness on the right shoulder and contusion on the posterior side of right thigh 2 cm x 2 cm and tenderness on the left shoulder. The witness has produced the Medical Certificate of Daiben Dhanabhai Devshi at Exh. 27. At the same time, Chandulal Devabhai Patar was brought for treatment and in the history, he had stated that he was assaulted with a Kadiyari Stick on 30.10.1999 at 12.30 am. On examination, the patient had a transverse contusion 7 inch x 1.5 inch, swelling 3 cm x 3 cm underneath tenderness, contusion vertical 6 inch x 1.5 inch tenderness, tenderness on the left thigh one leg and an abrasion 1 cm x 1 cm on the left leg. The witness was produced the Medical Certificate of Chandulal Devabhai Patar at Exh. 28. During the cross examination, the witness has stated that Maliben and Daiben had stated that they were assaulted by a delivery and all the injuries were simple in nature. The injuries that were sustained by Maliben and Daiben could be sustained Page 13 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined by a fall on a hard and blunt surface and if a fracture was on the hand, it could be sustained due to a fall or a dash against something.
8.4 PW5 - Bhanubhai Sidibhai examined at Exh. 30 is the son of the complainant and he too has supported the case of the prosecution. The witness has refused to identify the weapon and has stated that at the time of the incident, it was dark and he could not identify the weapon. During the cross examination, by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has admitted that the land is in possession of the accused and there is a case filed against them. That prior to this, they had filed a case under the Atrocity Act against some other person and at the time of the incident, it was dark and if there is shouting, the persons in the nearby field took come first but as they had a dispute with the accused regarding the land, they presumed that it was the accused who had attacked them and at the time of the incident, he was engaged in saving himself and he cannot say who had assaulted him. To save himself, he ran away from the place and besides the five accused, there were Page 14 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined about 25 to 30 people who had come to assault him and they all were shouting.
8.5 PW6 - Manjibhai Mavjibhai Pargi is the PSO who has registered the complaint of the complainant and has completed the necessary procedures and has produced the depute order at Exh. 36, special report at Exh. 37, wireless message sent to Dy.S.P, Junagadh at Exh. 38 and the extract of the station diary at Exh. 39.
8.6 PW7 - Bhupatbhai Tabhabhai Vala examined at Exh. 54 is an eye witness as per the case of the prosecution but the witness has not supported the case of the prosecution and has been declared hostile and cross-examined by the learned APP and nothing to support the case of the prosecution has come on record.
8.7 PW8 - Rajkumar Pandian examined at Exh. 56 is the Investigating Officer who has narrated the procedure undertaken by him during investigation. During the cross- examination by the learned APP, the witness has stated that during investigation it was found that Sidabhai was not well but he did not investigate about illness of Sidabhai. The Page 15 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined cause of the quarrel was the land and at the time of the incident, the possession of the land was with the accused. There are a number of persons with fields surrounding the place of incident and the statements of those persons were recorded and if there was any shout, the persons nearby would have heard that. The complainant has earlier filed two similar cases against the accused and the witness does not know as to whether by an order of his court, the possession of the land has been handed over to the accused. 8.8 PW9 - Dilabhai Mulabhai examined at Exh. 63 is the panch witness of the panchanama of the place of offence which is produced at the Exh. 64 and the witness has supported the case of the prosecution.
8.9 PW10 - Jayeshgiri Jasmatgiri examined at Exh. 65 is the panch witness of the panchnama of the place of the complainant and the injured witnesses which is produced at Exh. 66 and the witness has supported the case of the prosecution.
8.10 PW11 - Ismailbhai Rahimbhai Patni examined at Exh. 67 and PW12 - Mohammadbhai Rehmanbhai examined at Page 16 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined Exh. 69 are panch witnesses of the panchnama of the place of offence which is produced at the Exh. 68. Both the witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and have been declared hostile.
8.11 PW13 - Dr. Bhimjibhai Karshanbhai Kulbariya examined at Exh. 70 is the Medical Officer who was on duty at the Nagarpalika General Hospital in Veraval on 30.10.1999. The witness has stated that around 11.25 am, Maliben Sidibhai was brought for treatment and in the history, she had stated that somebody had assaulted her with a pipe and stick. The patient was primarily examined and treated by Medical Officer, CHC, Prabhaspatan and had come to Municipal General Hospital, Veraval for further investigation and treatment. The patient was referred to the Orthopedic Surgeon at Civil Hospital, Junagadh and the witness has produced the M.L.C. Certificate of Maniben Sidibhai at Exh. 71. On the same day, Chandubhai Devabhai was also brought with a refer chit from Prabhaspatan, CHC Hospital with history of assault by somebody with sticks and fists. The patient had taken Page 17 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined primary treatment at CHC, Prabhaspatan and he came for further investigation and treatment. On examination, there were two contusions with ecchymosis on the left scapular region 5 cm x 1 cm and 4 cm x 1 cm with black color and tenderness. The patient was unable to raise up his left arm. There was a swelling on the left ankle 3 cm x 3 cm with tenderness medially, a contusion with ecchymosis on the back of the right hand 4 cm x 3 cm black color with tenderness and an abrasion on the back of the left thigh 2 cm x 2 cm with dryclotted blood and tenderness. After the x-ray, it was found that the patient has sustained a fracture at the medial border of the left scapula. The patient went to Civil Hospital, Junagadh on 01.11.1999. The witness has produced the MLC Certificate of the Chandubhai Devabhai of the Municipal General Hospital at Exh. 72. At the same time, Bhanabhai Sidibhai was brought for treatment after taking primary treatment from CHC, Prabhaspatan and in the history, he has stated that he was assaulted by somebody with sticks and stones. He had taken primary treatment at CHC, Prabhaspatan and he had a complaint of Page 18 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined pain in the left knee, left foot, right cheek and throat. He was admitted in the hospital on 30.10.1999 at 11.00 am and was discharged on 02.11.1999 at 9.30 am. At the same time, Daiben Danabhai was also brought for treatment after being treated by the Medical Officer at CHC, Prabhaspatan and in the history, she has stated that she was assaulted with sticks and stones. She had come for x-ray investigation and the right upper arm x-ray did not show any abnormality. The witnesses produced the MLC Certificate of Daiben Danabhai at Exh. 74. In the cross examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that as the patients were earlier primarily treated at CHC, Prabhaspatan, the marks of treatment were found and Bhanabhai Sidibhai had only complaints of pain but the complaints could be false.
8.12 PW14 - Najirbhai Pirbhai examined at Exh. 75 is panch witness of the arrest panchnama produced at Exh. 76. 8.13 PW16 - Manojbhai Mangajibhai Balat examined at Exh. 92 has recorded the complaint of the complainant Page 19 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined which is produced at Exh. 96. During the cross examination, the witness has stated that the complainant came to him to file the complaint, she was old and uneducated and her thumb impression on the complaint produced at Exh. 96 has not been identified by anyone.
9. On minute appreciation of the entire evidence of the prosecution, the incident as per the complaint produced at Exh. 96 has occurred on 30.10.1999 of around 00.30 hours and the FIR has been registered on the same day at 08.00 am. The injured have been first taken to CHC, Prabhaspatan and thereafter, they were taken to Nagarpalika General Hospital at Veraval and the complainant and one injured person were referred to General Hospital, Junagadh. In the entire evidence, it has emerged that at the first instance, when the complainant and the injured were taken to CHC, Prabhaspatan, the complainant has named the accused no. 1 but before the Medical Officer at Nagarpalika General Hospital, Veraval all the injured have not named any person and have merely stated that somebody has injured them with sticks and Page 20 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined stones. At the General Hospital, Junagadh, two of the accused have been named and if the entire evidence is believed, there are major contradictions in the deposition of the injured and eyewitness. The evidence that has emerged is that at the time of the incident, the accused were in possession of the field where the incident has occurred and as per the say of the witnesses, they were in the field but there is no iota of evidence that they were the owners or occupiers of the field. Moreover, it has also emerged that at the time of the incident, it was dark and there were no lights surrounding the place and it was difficult to identify anyone. PW5 - Bhanubhai Sidibhai who is an eyewitness to the incident, has stated that besides the accused, there were 25 to 30 persons and they all were shouting and in the evidence it is also come on record that surrounding the place of incident, there were other persons who were present in the fields and if any shouting had taken place, they would be the first to come there. It appears that none of the independent witnesses have been examined before the learned Trial Court and only the interested witnesses Page 21 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined have been examined by the prosecution. Moreover, in the evidence, it has also emerged that one Bhayabhai had informed the police about the incident but the said Bhayabhai has not examined as a witness before the learned Trial Court. The entire evidence has been appreciated in detail by the learned Trial Court.
10. In view of the settled position of law in the decisions of Chandrappa (supra), the learned Trial Court has appreciated the entire evidence in proper perspective and there does not appear to be any infirmity and illegality in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. The learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence and this Court is of the considered opinion that the learned Trial Court was completely justified in acquitting the accused of the charges leveled against them. The findings recorded by the learned Trial Court are absolutely just and proper and no illegality or infirmity has been committed by the learned Trial Court and this Court is in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court. This Court Page 22 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/411/2011 JUDGMENT DATED: 06/08/2025 undefined finds no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order and the present appeal is devoid of merits and resultantly, the same is dismissed.
11. The impugned judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Veraval in Atro Sessions Case No. 4/2006 on 22.12.2010, is hereby confirmed.
12. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(S. V. PINTO,J) VASIM S. SAIYED Page 23 of 23 Uploaded by VASIM SHABBIR SAIYED(HC01902) on Fri Aug 08 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Aug 09 00:24:46 IST 2025