State Of Gujarat vs Arvindbhai Nathubhai Khara

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)

Here is the Appeal by the State under Section 419 of BNSS (corresponding Section 378 of the Cr.P.C.) against the judgment and order of acquittal.

Being dissatisfied by the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jamkhambhaliya, Devbhumi-Dwarka, passed in Sessions Case No. 127 of 2022 dated 23.09.2025, acquitting the accused Arvind Nathubhai from the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 504, 114 of the IPC and Section 135 of the G.P. Act.

We have heard Ms.Vrunda Shah, learned APP for the State appellant.

Brief facts giving rise to file the present Appeal are that on 28.09.2022 at about 03:30 p.m., the deceased Polabhai Rajabhai and his wife Somiben had gone to the house of the accused and during the discussions about the sale of stone slab, the dispute arose between the parties and in that process, the accused hurled abusive and in a fit of rage, the accused Govind Nathu fatally assaulted the deceased Polabhai with the weapon axe and the complainant Somiben, when intervened, she was beaten by the respondent accused Arvind Khara on her left leg and head with the weapon stick, as a result, deceased Polabhai succumbed to injuries and complainant Somiben sustained grievous injuries. The incident was reported to the Bhanvan Police Station and after registration of the offences, as referred above, and upon completion of the investigation, the accused were chargesheeted for the offences. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions at Jamkhambhaliya.

The learned Sessions Judge framed charges to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

In order to prove the charge, the prosecution has examined as many as 28 witnesses and produced and proved 48 documentary evidence. Admittedly, during the pendency of the case, the principal accused Govind Khara, who had killed the deceased Polabhai has been passed away and case against him stands abated.

On conclusion of oral evidence, the Trial Court recorded further statements of the accused as provided under Section 313 of the Code, wherein, the A2 claimed his innocence and stated that he has been falsely implicated in the offence.

The learned Sessions Judge, after appreciating and examining the oral as well as documentary evidence, acquitted the accused herein for the offences with which he was charged, however, the A2 Arvind Nathu stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 324 of the IPC for causing injuries to the complainant Somiben and after hearing him, he has been sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment.

In such circumstances, the Trial Court while acquitting the accused, held and observed that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charge of murder and criminal intimidation against the accused no.2 by leading cogent and convincing evidence.

Ms.Vrunda Shah, learned APP appearing for and on behalf of the State, assailing the judgment and order of acquittal, has submitted that the findings of acquittal are contrary to law and evidence on record and the findings recorded are palpably erroneous and based on the irrelevant material; that the Trial Court failed to appreciate that at the time of incident, the respondent accused Arvind Khara was present along with the principal accused and the manner in which, he had caused the injuries to the complainant, the legitimate inference would arise that there was abatement by him to the principal accused and in pursuance of the abatement, he caused injuries to Somiben and therefore, considering the vicarious liability, the respondent accused, though did not have caused a fatal injuries to the deceased, but he will be liable for the abatement and therefore, his acquittal for the charge of Section 302 is contrary to the evidence on record.

In such circumstances, the view taken by the trial Court is unreasonable and findings are perverse, which has resulted into miscarriage of justice and therefore, it has been submitted that the appeal may be admitted.

In the present case the issue falls for our consideration as to whether the trial Court was justified in acquitting the accused?

We have carefully examined the oral as well as documentary evidence and perused the findings of acquittal rendered by the Trial Court.

Before proceeding to address the rival submissions, we would like to place on record the scope of interference in an appeal against the acquittal and when the same is justified. In exceptional cases, where there are compelling circumstances and the judgment under appeal is found to be perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the judgment of acquittal. The Appellate Court should bear in mind the presence of innocence of the accused and further that, the trial Court’s acquittal bolsters the presumption of his innocence. Interference in a routine manner, where the other view of possible should be avoided, unless there are reasons for interference.

In the facts of the present case, it is not in dispute that the death of the deceased is homicidal in nature.

The respondent accused Arvind Khara did not have inflicted any blow to deceased Polabhai. According to the prosecution case, he had caused injuries to the complainant Somiben. Admittedly, he has been found guilty for causing grievous hurt to Somiben. In such circumstances, having regard to the conduct of the respondent accused and evidence of eyewitnesses, merely presence of the accused would itself is not sufficient to infer that he had abetted the principal accused and the injuries caused to Somiben was committed in pursuance of the abatement. Therefore, the necessary ingredients of the offence to prove the charge of murder are missing and as such, there is no sufficient evidence led by the prosecution to prove the charge against the respondent accused.

Thus, after reanalysis of the evidence, we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution miserably failed to prove the charge of murder, punishable under Section 302 and charge under Section 504 of the IPC read with Section 114 against the accused respondent beyond reasonable doubt.

In the result, we do not find any perversity in the impugned judgment and in absence of substantial and compelling reason, no ground exists to interfere with the findings of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court and therefore, in our view, the Trial Court was justified in acquitting the accused.

Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed at admission stage. R&P, if any, be sent back to the concerned court forthwith.