Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Karshanbhai Virdasbhai Patel on 1 July, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1586 of 2009
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
KARSHANBHAI VIRDASBHAI PATEL & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS JYOTI BHATT ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s)
No. 1
MR DIVYOM LAWALE FOR MR VICKY B MEHTA(5422) for the Opponent(s)/
Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
PRACHCHHAK
Date : 01/07/2026
JUDGMENT
1. The appellant – State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal under
Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(hereinafter referred to as “CrPC“) against the judgment and order
dated 05.05.2009 passed by the learned Presiding Officer and
Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no.2, Deesa Camp at
Deodar (hereinafter be referred to as “the trial Court”) in Special
(Atrocity) Case No.103 of 2008, whereby the trial Court has acquitted
the original accused (respondent herein) from the offences punishable
under Sections 324, 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter
referred to as “IPC“) and Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and
Page 1 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter
referred to as “Atrocity Act”).
2. Short facts of the prosecution case are that complainant –
Kiranbhai Nagjibhai Dalit (Chamar) is resident of village Rampura,
Taluka Tharad and doing labour work. That, on 23.04.2008 at about
11.00 am, complainant was selling onion on the otta of Hanumanji
Temple and at that time Karnabhai Mahadevbhai Patel had come for
worship of Hanumanji alongwith respondent-accused. That, on seeing
complainant on otta of temple, respondent-accused asked
complainant about permission for selling onion on otta of temple.
That, the complainant has replied that certain village people are also
selling vegetables and kulfi on otta of temple and that is why he is
also sitting on the otta. That, on hearing the reply from the
complainant, respondent got excited and flung filthy abuses relating
to the caste of complainant, more particularly, by using words like
“Sala Dhedha Koda” and thereafter, threw away the onion, scale and
bajara. That, the respondent had inflicted knife blow to the
complainant and thereby, caused injuries on the right hand palm of
the complainant. That, the complainant shouted for help and
Danabhai Kalabhai Nai etc. came to the place of incident and saved
the complainant from further beating. Thereafter, complainant has
filed complaint before Tharad Police Station, vide CR No. II-52/2008
for the alleged offences under sec. 324, 506(2) of IPC and sec. 3(1)
(10) of the Atrocity Act. On completion of investigation, charge sheet
was submitted into the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Tharad.
2.1 The charge against the accused came to be framed by the trial
Court vide Exhibit 1 for the aforesaid offences against the accused.
On being explained it to him, the accused has denied having
Page 2 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
committed any offence. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge
and pleaded for trial and hence, the case was tried by the learned
Presiding Officer and Additional Sessions Judge, Deesa Camp at
Deodar.
3. It appears from the records that to prove the case, the
prosecution has examined 9 witnesses and also produced 11
documentary evidences.
4. After closure of the evidence, the statement of the accused
under section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been
recorded wherein he denied of having committed any offence and has
stated that he is innocent.
5. After hearing both sides and considering the evidence on
records, the trial Court by impugned judgment and order has
acquitted the accused from all the charges levelled against him.
6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment
and order of acquittal the appellant – State of Gujarat has preferred
this appeal.
7. Heard Ms. Jyoti Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
the appellant – State of Gujarat and Mr. Divyom Lawale, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Vicky Mehta, learned counsel for
the respondent – accused at length. Though notice served,
respondent no.2-original complainant has chosen not to remain
present before this Court.
8. Ms. Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for
Page 3 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
the appellant – State of Gujarat has submitted the same facts which
are narrated in the memo of appeal and has also submitted that the
prosecution has examined 9 witnesses and produced 11 documentary
evidences, despite this fact, the trial Court has not considered the
same in its true and proper perspective in passing the judgment and
order of acquittal. Ms.Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor,
while referring to the entire oral as well as documentary evidence,
has assailed the impugned judgment and order and submitted that
the trial Court has not taken into consideration the evidence
connecting the accused to the alleged offence in its proper
perspective and even the prosecution has been able to prove the
charges levelled against the accused. While referring to the evidence
of the witnesses and the material collected against the accused, Ms.
Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the
prosecution has established the case against the accused by
examining the witnesses, who have supported the case of the
prosecution, however, the trial Court has discarded and disbelieved
the evidence of these witnesses. She has submitted that the
witnesses have fully supported the case of the prosecution, however,
the trial Court has not appreciated the same and passed the judgment
and order of acquittal which is illegal and unjust. She has submitted
that it is settled legal position that the evidence of a single witness is
sufficient for conviction if the same is reliable and trustworthy and in
the present case, though the evidence of all the witnesses are reliable
and trustworthy, without any cogent reason, the trial Court has
disbelieved and discarded the evidence of the witnesses.
8.1 Ms. Bhatt, learned APP has submitted that the trial Court has
erred in holding that there is animosity between the complainant and
respondent and therefore, it cannot be denied that complainant has
Page 4 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
not filed false complaint against respondent with intention to involve
the respondent in false case. She has submitted that the trial court
has not appreciated the evidence of Pankaj Gupta who has stated that
the injuries caused to the complainant could have been possible by
muddamal knife and injury certificate to that effect was also
produced. According to Ms.Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor,
the trial Court ought to have convicted the accused and ought to have
imposed necessary sentence. She has prayed to allow the present
appeal and to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order
of acquittal.
9. Per contra, Mr.Lawale, learned counsel for the respondent –
accused has supported the impugned judgment and order and has
submitted that the trial Court has not committed any error of law and
fact in acquitting the accused from the charges levelled against him.
He has submitted that the ingredients of the offence alleged against
the accused are not proved beyond reasonable doubt and, therefore,
the trial Court has rightly acquitted the accused as the complainant
has failed to prove the charge levelled against the accused. He has
also submitted that there is no iota of evidence to connect the
accused with the alleged crime in question. He has prayed to confirm
the impugned judgment and dismiss the present appeal.
10. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and
perused the materials on record. On perusal of the impugned
judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial Court, the
questions that arise for determination are as under:-
(1) whether the trial Court has rightly justified in passing the
judgment and order of acquittal.
Page 5 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
(2) whether the trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence
led by the prosecution in recording the reasons.
(3) whether there is any illegality, irregularity and perversity in
the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
11. On perusal of the record it appears that on 23.04.2008 at about
11:00 am, the complainant was selling onion on the otta of the
Hanumanji temple situated at Rampura; at that time, the respondent-
accused along with three other persons asked complainant to leave
the place. Thereafter, an altercation took place between the
complainant and the respondent and during the altercation, the
respondent-accused inflicted a knife blow on the palm of PW-3, the
complainant (Exhibit 13), thereby causing injury to PW-3. Thereafter,
the complainant went to his house, informed his father about the
incident, and, along with his uncle, proceeded to lodge an FIR against
the respondent-accused. While they were on their way to the police
station to lodge the FIR, the accused again intercepted them and
threatened them with dire consequences. Under these circumstances,
the incident occurred, and the FIR came to be registered by the
informant. It appears that during the course of the investigation, none
of the independent witnesses have supported the case of the
prosecution including the uncle, PW-6, Talshabhai Pujabhai at Exhibit
20, who was stated to have accompanied the complainant, did not
support the prosecution case and was declared hostile. However, a
minute examination of the evidence reveals that even the events
stated by the complainant did not transpire, nor did any alleged
offence occur because he failed to disclose the name of the assailant.
It appears that even while obtaining medical treatment, the
complainant did not inform the doctor about the names of the
Page 6 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
assailants and consequently, the doctor also did not record the names
of the assailants while noting the medical history at the time of
admitting the patient.
11.1 It is observed by the trial Court that the weapon allegedly used
in the commission of the offence was not sent to the Forensic Science
Laboratory for examination and no bloodstains were found on the
weapon. Unless there is positive evidence to establish that the injury
sustained by the complainant was caused by the said weapon, the
prosecution cannot be said to have proved beyond reasonable doubt
that the injury was inflicted by the knife used by the accused. The
prosecution has failed to produce any evidence connecting the
present respondent with the crime in question. Therefore, under these
circumstances, the impugned judgment and order passed by the trial
Court is in consonance with the facts and evidence on record. It
appears that a specific question was asked to PW-5, Dr. Pankaj
Lakshminarayan Gupta, as to whether the injury sustained by the
complainant was possible by the alleged weapon and whether the
said weapon had been used to cause the injury, to which the doctor
answered that, unless and until a scientific report was available, no
definite opinion could be given. Accordingly, the trial Court, while
appreciating the evidence of PW-5 at Exhibit 17, has thoroughly
discussed his deposition and, after due consideration thereof, has
rightly passed the impugned judgment and order. Even from the
evidence of the Investigating Officer, the prosecution has failed to
bring on record any material connecting the present respondent with
the crime in question. Since the presumption of innocence is already
established by the accused before the trail Court, the respondent is
having double presumption in his favour with regard to innocence. In
view of the above, I am of the opinion that the trial Court has not
Page 7 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
committed any error of facts and law in passing the impugned
judgment and order and there is no any illegality and infirmity found
in the judgment and order.
12. At this stage, it would be appropriate to refer to the decision of
the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Shajan Skaria Vs. State of
Kerala reported in AIR 2024 SC 4557, wherein, the Hon’ble Apex
Court has explained the provisions of Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity
Act, which is reiterated and clarified in the subsequent judgment of
the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Gunjan @ Girija Kumari Vs.
State (Nct Of Delhi) reported in 2026 (0) INSC 468, wherein the
Hon’ble Apex Court has clarified that only when abusive words are
uttered in a public place within public view, with an intention of
insulting a particular person on the basis of his community, then
under that circumstance only it attracts the ingredients of Section
3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act and for establishing the commission of the
offence, the prosecution must lead prima facie satisfactory, cogent,
and material evidence to prove its case and herein the present case,
the evidence is completely silent on that aspect and no other
witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution.
13. It is well settled by catena of decisions that the an Appellate
Court has full power to review, re-appreciate and reconsider the
evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. However,
Appellate Court 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.
Page 8 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption
of their innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened
by the trial Court.
14. Further, 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. Further, while
exercising the powers in appeal against the order of acquittal, the
Court of appeal would not ordinarily interfere with the order of
acquittal unless the approach of the lower Court is vitiated by some
manifest illegality and the conclusion arrived at would not be arrived
at by any reasonable person and, therefore, the decision is to be
characterized as perverse. Merely because two views are possible, the
Court of appeal would not take the view which would upset the
judgment delivered by the Court below. However, the Appellate Court
has a power to review the evidence if it is of the view that the
conclusion arrived at by the Court below is perverse and the Court has
committed a manifest error of law and ignored the material evidence
on record. A duty is cast upon the Appellate Court, in such
circumstances, to re-appreciate the evidence to arrive to a just
decision on the basis of material placed on record to find out whether
the accused are connected with the commission of the crime with
which he is charged.
15. The scope and principles are enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex
Court in case of Chandrappa and others Vs. State of Karnataka
reported in (2007) 4 SCC 415, more particularly paragraph Nos.
42 and 43, which was subsequently re-affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex
Court Rajesh Prasad Vs. State of Bihar and another, reported in
[2022] 3 SCC 471, wherein, the Hon’ble Apex Court has enunciated
Page 9 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
the general principles in case of acquittal, more particularly in
paragraph No. 26 the general principles are set out by the Hon’ble
Apex Court based upon various decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court.
Then in case of Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar Vs. State of
Karnataka, reported in AIR 2024 SC 2252 = (2024) 8 SCC 149,
the Hon’ble Apex Court has dealt with the similar issue, more
particularly, in paragraph Nos. 37 to 40. For the purpose of
considering the provisions of Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act, it is
worthwhile to refer to the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the case of Talari Naresh Vs. State of Telangana, reported in
2026 (0) INSC 486 and in case of Sohanvir @ Sohanvir Dhama
Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2025 (16) JT 81. Hence, I am in
complete agreement with the findings recorded by the trial Court.
16. It is also worthwhile to refer to the recent decision of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh vs. State of
Karnataka, reported in [2024] 9 SCC 169, wherein the Hon’ble
Supreme Court has held and observed in paras-20 and 21 as under:-
“20. At this stage, it would be relevant to refer to the
general principles culled out by this Court in Chandrappa
and others vs. State of Karnataka , regarding the power of
the appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against a
judgment of acquittal. The principles read thus:
“42. …. (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
Page 10 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
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 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 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.
21. In Rajendra Prasad v. State of Bihar, a three-Judge
Bench of this Court pointed out that it would be essential
for the High Court, in an appeal against acquittal, to clearly
indicate firm and weighty grounds from the record for
discarding the reasons of the Trial Court in order to be able
to reach a contrary conclusion of guilt of the accused. It
was further observed that, in an appeal against acquittal, it
would not be legally sufficient for the High Court to take a
contrary view about the credibility of witnesses and it is
absolutely imperative that the High Court convincingly
finds it well-nigh impossible for the Trial Court to reject
their testimony. This was identified as the quintessence of
the jurisprudential aspect of criminal justice. Viewed in this
light, the brusque approach of the High Court in dealing
with the appeal, resulting in the conviction of Appellant
Nos. 1 and 2, reversing the cogent and well-considered
judgment of acquittal by the Trial Court giving them the
benefit of doubt, cannot be sustained.”
17. Considering the entire evidence on record, it clearly appears
that there is no credible evidence to connect the present accused with
Page 11 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1586/2009 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/07/2026
undefined
the alleged crime and the evidence on record is not so convincing to
prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has committed the
alleged crime. Therefore, the accused cannot be convicted on the
evidence on record.
18. On perusal of the impugned judgment and order, it clearly
transpires that the trial Court has not committed any error of fact and
law in appreciating the evidence on record and in acquitting the
accused from the charges levelled against him. Even on re-
appreciation of the evidence, it clearly transpires that the prosecution
has miserably failed to prove the charge levelled against the accused
beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, the impugned judgment and
order of the trial Court is sustainable and the present appeal is liable
to be dismissed.
19. In view of the above, the present appeal is devoid of merits and
it deserves to be dismissed. Resultantly, it is dismissed. The
impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial Court is
hereby confirmed. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and
proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
ANUSRI
Page 12 of 12
Uploaded by ANUSRI VASU(HC02352) on Tue Jul 21 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 24 21:21:11 IST 2026
