Gujarat High Court
The State Of Gujarat vs Prabhudas Odhavji Kamothi on 8 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 267 of 2006
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
THE STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
PRABHUDAS ODHAVJI KAMOTHI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS.C.M.SHAH, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
ABATED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR BM MANGUKIYA(437) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 3
MS BELA A PRAJAPATI(1946) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 08/04/2026
JUDGMENT
1] This appeal has been filed by the appellant – State under
Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against
the judgment and order of acquittal dated 15-09-2005 passed by
the learned Special (ACB) Judge, Fast Track Court No.1,
Amreli (herein after referred to as ‘the learned Trial Court’) in
Special (ACB) Case No. 10 of 1993, whereby, the learned Trial
Court has acquitted the respondent from the offences punishable
under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of
Page 1 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
Corruption Act, 1988 (herein after referred to as the ” the PC Act)
and Sections 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
1.1] During the pendency of this appeal, the respondent
Nos. 1 and 2, who were the public servants expired and hence the
appeal qua the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 was abated by an order
dated 14-05-2025.
1.2] The respondents are hereinafter referred to as ‘the
accused’ as they stood in the rank and file 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] The accused No. 1 was working as the District
Education Officer, Amreli, and was a public servant. The accused
No. 2 was the President of Bhoringda Kelvani Mandal running by
Smt. Jiviben Bhimjibhai Balar Uttar Buniyadi Madhyamik
Shada, Bhoringda and the accused No. 3 was his son of the accused
No. 1 and a private person. Rasikbhai Nathabhai Lakhani, the son-
in-law of the complainant Ambabhai Harkhabhai Sawani, was
working as an honorary teacher in Smt. Jiviben Bhimjibhai Balar
Uttar Buniyadi Madhyamik Shada for the past one and a half
years. Interviews for the post of a teacher were to be held on 17-02-
Page 2 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
1989 and the Selection Committee consisting of the accused No. 1
and 2 demanded an amount of illegal gratification of Rs.20,000/-
from Rasikbhai Nathabhai Lakhani. As per the say of the
complainant, an amount of Rs. 15,000/- was paid on 25-02-1989
to deceased Labhubhai Parshottambhai Balar, the Secretary of
Bhoringda Kelvani Mandal. The amount was borrowed from
Manjhibhai Dayalbhai Sawani and given but in spite of that, the
accused were demanding an amount of Rs. 50,000/- and caused
mental harassment to said Rasikbhai, Nathabhai Lakhani, who was
so fed up of the ill-treatment that on 11-03-1989 while he was at his
house, he doused kerosene on himself and set himself ablaze. He
was immediately taken to the emergency ward of Civil Hospital,
Amreli for treatment and expired on 13-03-1989 at Civil Hospital,
Amreli during treatment. The complaint was filed by Ambabhai
Harkhabhai Sawani, the father-in-law of deceased Rasikbhai
Nathabhai Lakhani, which came to be registered under Sections 7,
12, 13(1)(d), 13(2) of the PC Act and Section 306 of the IPC, which
came to be registered at ACB Police Station, Amreli, I-C.R.No. 4 of
1989.
2.2] The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of
the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and
Page 3 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
after the order of sanction for prosecution for the accused No. 1
was received, a charge sheet came to be filed before the learned
Sessions Court, Amreli, which came to be registered as Special
Case No. 10 of 1993.
2.3] The accused was duly served with the summons and
the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court, and it was
verified whether the copies of all the papers papers were provided
to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code. A
charge at Exh. 50 was framed against the accused and the
statements of the accused were recorded at Exh. 51 to Exh. 53
respectively, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the
charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on
record.
2.4] The prosecution produced fourteen oral and thirty
documentary evidences to bring home the charge against the
accused and after the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed
the closing pursis at Exh:134, the further statements of the accused
under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were
recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the
prosecution on record. The accused refused to step into the witness
box or examine witnesses on his behalf and stated that a false case
Page 4 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
has been filed against them. 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
judgment and order was pleased to acquit the accused from all the
charges leveled against them.
3] Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and
order of acquittal, the appellant – State has filed the present appeal
mainly stating that the impugned judgment and order of acquittal
is contrary to law and evidence on record and against the weight of
evidence on record of the case and bad in law. The learned Trial
Court ought to have considered that the deceased was unable to
manage for the amount demanded by the respondents, who were
the interviewers, and, hence, committed suicide and there was no
other reason for the deceased to commit suicide. The learned Trial
Court has not appreciated the evidence of Shardaben at Exh:61,
who has narrated the fact of demand being made by the
respondents for the purpose of getting selected as a Teacher. The
learned Trial Court has not given due weightage to the evidence of
Jodhabhai Rupabhai Bharwad, who has stated that on 12-03-1989,
at about 08.00 hours, when he was standing at the shop of
Kantibhai Sheth, Rasikbhai came out from his house in a burning
Page 5 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
condition and Manubhai took a mattress and covered the body of
Rasikbhai in order to extinguish the fire. At that time, he had asked
the deceased for the reason for doing the act, to which, the
deceased replied that he had paid Rs. 15,000/- for selection but
was unable to pay the remaining amount, and, hence, he had
committed suicide. The evidence of this witness before whom the
deceased has disclosed the fact, clearly establishes, that the
deceased was driven to commit suicide as he was unable to fulfill
the demand being made by the respondents. The learned Trial
Court has not appreciated the other evidence of the witnesses and
the impugned judgement and order of acquittal being contrary to
law and evidence on record is required to be quashed and set aside.
4] Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. C.M.Shah
for the appellant – State.
5] Learned APP C.M.Shah has taken this Court through the
entire evidence of the prosecution and has stated that the appeal
qua the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 has abated but there is sufficient
evidence that the respondent No. 3 being the son of the respondent
No. 2 was present at the time when the amount of Rs.15,000/- was
given and he, too, was involved in the abatement of the suicide of
deceased – Rasikbhai Nathabhai Lakhani but the learned Trial
Page 6 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
Court has not appreciated the evidence in true perspective. The
involvement of the respondent No. 3 has been proved beyond
reasonable doubts and the impugned judgement and order of
acquittal is required to be quashed and set aside.
6] With regard to acquittal appeals, at this juncture, it would be
appropriate to reproduce the observations of the Apex Court in
Paras 11 and 12 in the case of P Somaraju Versus State of
Andhra Pradesh reported in 2025 INSC 1263:-
” 11. Before proceeding, it would be appropriate to recapitulate the well-
settled principles governing interference with an order of acquittal by an
Appellate Court, which were also discussed by the High Court in the
impugned judgment. At the outset, we rely upon the seminal case of
Chandrappa & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka,4 wherein this Court had laid
down the five-point canonical test as follows:
“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 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 extensive
powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such
phraseologies are more in the nature of “flourishes of language” to
emphasis 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 7 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
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.” 4 (2007) 4 SCC 415.
12. To summarize, an Appellate Court undoubtedly has full power to
review and re appreciate evidence in an appeal against acquittal under
Sections 378 and 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. However, due
to the reinforced or ‘double’ presumption of innocence after acquittal,
interference must be limited. If two reasonable views are possible on the
basis of the record, the acquittal should not be disturbed. Judicial
intervention is only warranted where the Trial Court’s view is perverse,
based on misreading or ignoring material evidence, or results in manifest
miscarriage of justice. Moreover, the Appellate Court must address the
reasons given by the Trial Court for acquittal before reversing it and
assigning its own. A catena of the recent judgments of this Court has more
firmly entrenched this position, including, inter alia, Mallappa & Ors. vs.
State of Karnataka, 2024 INSC 104 6 2024 INSC 258, Ballu @ Balram @
Balmukund & Anr. vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, Babu Sahebagouda
Rudragoudar and Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, 2024 INSC 320 and
Constable 907 Surendra Singh & Anr. vs. State of Uttarakhand, reported in
2025 INSC 114.”
7] It is a settled principle of law that in an appeal against
acquittal, the Appellate Court is circumscribed by limitation that
no interference has to be made in the order of acquittal unless after
appreciation of the evidence produced before the learned Trial
Court, it appears that there are some manifest illegality or
perversity which could not have been possibly arrived at by the
Court. It is also a settled principle that there is no embargo on the
Appellate Court to review the evidence but, generally the order of
Page 8 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
acquittal shall not be interfered with as the presumption of
innocence of the accused is further strengthened by the order of
acquittal. The golden thread which runs through the web of
administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are
possible on the evidence adduced in the case of the prosecution i.e.
(i) guilt of the accused and (ii) his innocence, the view, which is in
favour of the accused, should be adopted, and if the trial Court has
taken the view in favour of the accused, the Appellate Court should
not disturb the findings of the acquittal. The Appellate Court can
interfere with the judgment and order of acquittal only when there
are compelling and substantial reasons and the order is clearly
unreasonable and where the Appellate Court comes to conclusion
that based on the evidence, the conviction is a must.
8] As the appeal pertains to a case under Section 306 of the IPC,
it would be appropriate to reproduce the observations of the
Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mahendra Awase vs The
State of Madhya Pradhesh Criminal Appeal No. 221/2025
(@ SLP(Cr) No. 11868/2023) passed on 17th January, 2025
which is as under:
11. Section 306 of the IPC reads as under:-
“306. Abetment of suicide. If any person commits suicide,
whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall bePage 9 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
12. Section 107 of the IPC reads as under:-
“107. Abetment of a thing.-A person abets the doing of a thing,
who-
First. – Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly. – Engages with one or more other person or persons
in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal
omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in
order to the doing of that thing; orThirdly. – Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the
doing of that thing.”
As is clear from the plain language of the Sections to attract
the ingredient of Section 306, the accused should have abetted
the commission of a suicide. A person abets the doing of a
thing who Firstly – instigates any person to do that thing or
Secondly – engages with one or more other person or persons
in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal
omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in
order to the doing of that thing or Thirdly – intentionally aids,
by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
13. In Swamy Prahaladdas vs. State of M.P. and Another,
[1995 Supp (3) SCC 438], the appellant remarked to the
deceased that ‘go and die’ and the deceased thereafter,
committed suicide. This Court held that:-
“3. …Those words are casual nature which are often employed
in the heat of the moment between quarreling people. Nothing
serious is expected to follow thereafter. The said act does not
reflect the requisite ‘mens rea’ on the assumption that these
words would be carried out in all events. …”
14. In Madan Mohan Singh vs. State of Gujarat and Another,
(2010) 8 SCC 628, this Court held that in order to bring out an
offence under Section 306 IPC specific abetment as
contemplated by Section 107 IPC on the part of the accused
with an intention to bring about the suicide of the person
concerned as a result of that abetment is required. It was
further held that the intention of the accused to aid or to
instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must
for attracting Section 306.
Page 10 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
15. In Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu vs. State of West Bengal,
(2010) 1 SCC 707, this Court held as under:-
“12. Thus, this Court has consistently taken the view that
before holding an accused guilty of an offence under Section
306 IPC, the court must scrupulously examine the facts and
circumstances of the case and also assess the evidence adduced
before it in order to find out whether the cruelty and
harassment meted out to the victim had left the victim with no
other alternative but to put an end to her life. It is also to be
borne in mind that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide there
must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the
commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment
without there being any positive action proximate to the time
of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or
compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of
Section 306 IPC is not sustainable. [Emphasis supplied]
16. In order to bring a case within the purview of Section 306
IPC there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of
the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the
commission of suicide must have played an active role by an
act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the
commission of suicide. Therefore, the act of abetment by the
person charged with the said offence must be proved and
established by the prosecution before he could be convicted
under Section 306 IPC.
17. M. Mohan vs. State, (2011) 3 SCC 626 followed Ramesh
Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618, wherein it
was held as under:-
41. This Court in SCC para 20 of Ramesh Kumar has examined
different shades of the meaning of “instigation”. Para 20 reads
as under: (SCC p. 629)“20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or
encourage to do ‘an act’. To satisfy the requirement of
instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must
be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must
necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence.
Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be
capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where
the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued
course of conduct created such circumstances that the
deceased was left with no other option except to commit
suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A
Page 11 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending
the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be
instigation.”
In the said case this Court came to the conclusion that there is
no evidence and material available on record where-from an
inference of the appellant accused having abetted commission
of suicide by Seema (the appellant’s wife therein) may
necessarily be drawn.”
Thereafter, this Court in Mohan (supra) held:-
45. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases
decided by this Court are clear that in order to convict a
person under Section 306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea
to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct
act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option
and this act must have been intended to push the deceased into
such a position that he/she committed suicide.” [Emphasis
supplied] ”
9] In light on the above settled principles of law in acquittal
appeals under the PC Act, considering the evidence of the
prosecution, to bring home the charge against the accused,
Prosecution Witness No. 1 – Shardaben Ambabhai Sawani
examined at Exh:61, is the wife of deceased Rasikbhai, who has
stated that, at the time of the incident she was residing at
Gariyadhar at her parental home as she was a teacher in the
primary school at Parvadi village. Her husband was giving
honorary service at the Bhoringda Primary School for the past one
and half years and the accused No. 2 was the President of the
Bhoringda Kelavani Mandal and the Secretary was one Labhubhai.
The Selection Committee consisted of the accused No. 1, the
Page 12 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
accused No. 2 and the Secretary Dasbhai and they had demanded
an amount of Rs. 50,000/- from him. Her husband had informed
her father about the demand, but as they could not afford to pay
the amount of Rs.50,000/-, it was decided that an amount of
Rs.20,000/- would be paid. An amount of Rs. 15,000/- was given
at the house of the accused No. 3 to the accused No. 1, in the
presence of the accused No. 3 and at that time, her father and
Manjibhai Dayalbhai were present. The interview that was
scheduled was cancelled and once again the interviews were to be
conducted after a month. The committee members had told her
husband that he had to pay the amount as decided or there was
another candidate, who was ready to pay an amount of
Rs.50,000/-. Secretary Labhubhai might have told her husband
about the demand and her husband was mentally tense as the
amount could not be arranged for and he doused himself with
kerosene and tried to commit suicide. He was taken to the hospital
at Amreli for treatment and expired on the next day during
treatment.
In the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the
accused, the witness stated that she was residing with her father at
Gariyadhar and about one month and seven days prior to the
Page 13 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
incident, she was married to deceased Rasikbhai. Her husband was
not getting any salary, as he was doing honorary work, and at the
time of their engagement, she was working as a Primary Teacher
and earning an amount of Rs.2,000/- as salary. She had met her
husband before the interview on 27-02-1989 but she does not
know what conversation had taken place between her husband and
the accused. 11-03-1989 was a Sunday and she had gone to
Bhoringada village on 10-03-1989 to meet her husband, and, at
that time, she came to know that the next interview was scheduled
on 23-08-1989. Her father had filed the complaint but he had
expired and the interview that was scheduled on 17-02-1989 was
cancelled but she does not know reason for the cancellation of the
interview. Her husband was a Master of Arts with Sanskrit and as
he was well qualified, he could get a job in any school.
9.1] Prosecution Witness No. 2 – Manjibhai Dayalbhai
Sawani examined at Exhibit 63 is the nephew of deceased
Rasikbhai, who has supported the case of the prosecution. The
witness has stated that Rasikbhai was to appear in the interview for
the teachers at Bhoringada Kelavani Mandal High School and the
accused No.1 was the District Education Officer and the Director of
the Society was one Durlabhjibhai Korat. The accused No. 1 and 2,
Page 14 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
Secretary Labubhai and Durlabhji were the members of the
Selection Committee and Rasikbhai had told him that the accused
No. 1 had told him that any candidate from outside would have to
pay Rs.70,000/- but as he was giving honorary service for the past
two years, he could pay an amount of Rs.40,000/-. On 17-06-1989,
Durlabhji Korat, who was the Director of the society did not
remain present and his signature was not affixed on the selection
list but the interviews had taken place and he took the interview
papers along with his uncle Ambabhai, his other uncle Babubhai
and the accused No. 2 and Labhubhai and they went from
Bhoringada to Amreli to the house of the accused No. 3. The
accused No. 3 spoke to the accused No. 2 and the accused No. 1
came to the house of the accused No. 3. They had a discussion and
at that time, he had paid an amount of Rs.15,000/- to the Secretary
Labhubhai and had promised to pay the remaining amount of
Rs.5,000/- after the order was received. After the incident,
Rasikbhai told him that he was selected in the interview but they
were demanding for more amount and the demand was by
Secretary – Labhubhai, who told him that the outside party was
ready to pay Rs.70,000/- and hence he had doused himself with
kerosene and set himself ablaze.
Page 15 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
In the cross examination by the learned advocate for the
accused, the witness has stated that he had given the amount of
Rs.15,000/- to Labhubhai. The witness has admitted that the wife
of Rasikbhai was of a darker complexion than him and his father-
in-law was suffering from Leukoderma.
9.2] Prosecution Witness No. 3 – Valjibhai Ranchhodbhai
Sawani examined at Exh:66 is the nephew of the complainant, who
is a hearsay witness and has stated that he came to know about the
incident and the reason for the incident through the complainant.
In the cross examination by the learned advocate for the
accused, the witness has stated that when he went to the house of
the accused No. 2, the accused No. 3 was not present and in his
presence Ambabhai and Manjibhai merely had a conversation with
the accused No. 2.
9.3] Prosecution Witness No. 4 – Babubhai Harjibhai
Sawani examined at Exh:67 is the cousin brother of the
complainant Ambabhai Harkhabhai Sawani. The witness is also a
hearsay witness who came to know about the incident from the
complainant – Ambabhai Harkhabhai. The witness has also
admitted that when he went to Bhoringada, the accused No. 1 or 3
were not present at the house of the accused No. 2.
Page 16 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
9.4] Prosecution Witness No. 5 – Nathabhai Bhagwanbhai
Lakhani examined at Exh: 70 is the father of the deceased, who has
supported the case of the prosecution and in the cross examination
has admitted that he did not have any conversation with his son
and, when, his son was in the hospital, he was unconscious and he
did not have any talk with him. He did not meet his son between
the interview and the time of the incident.
9.5] Prosecution Witness No. 6 – Joddhabhai Rupabhai
Bharwad, examined at Exh.71, has deposed that on 12-03-1989 at
about 8:00 p.m., he was standing at the Paan shop of Kantibhai
Sheth. At that time, Rasikbhai Lakhani came out of his house in a
burning condition and fell in the house of the neighbour,
Manubhai. Manubhai Wania immediately covered Rasikbhai with
a quilt and extinguished the fire. Thereafter, they lifted him and
took him inside the house, and after about two hours, he was taken
to Government Hospital, Gariyadhar, and thereafter for further
treatment to Amreli. At that time, Rameshbhai Shivlal, the priest of
the village, had also arrived there. They inquired with Rasikbhai as
to why he had taken such an extreme step, and Rasikbhai stated
that he had paid an amount of Rs.15,000/- for securing a job, but
as he could not arrange the remaining amount, he had taken this
Page 17 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
step.
In the cross-examination, the witness admitted that while
they were lifting and taking Rasikbhai, Labhubhai, Ramjibhai,
Shamjibhai and Dr. Nimavat were also present. He further
admitted that Ramjibhai Shamjibhai was working in the same
school as Rasikbhai as a teacher, and it was Ramjibhai, who had
informed the Police about the conversation with Rasikbhai.
9.6] Prosecution Witness No. 7 – Dhirajlal Amrutlal Joshi
examined at Exh:73 was also working in Smt. Jiviben Bhimjibhai
Balar Uttar Buniyadi Madhyamik Shala for two years as a peon
and he has stated that Ramjibhai Balar and Rasikbhai Lakhani
were also working as teachers. He was paid an amount of Rs.150/-
and Ramjibhai Balar and Rasikbhai Lakhani were paid Rs.750/-
each. He does not know whether Rasikbhai Lakhani and Ramjibhai
Balar were, in fact, being paid any salary but their signatures were
taken on the salary vouchers.
9.7] Prosecution Witness No. 8 – Dr. Anilkumar
Damodardas Aashar, examined at Exh:80, is the Medical Officer,
who conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of
deceased Rasikbhai Nathabhai Lakhani. The witness has produced
the postmortem note at Exh:81 and has deposed that the cause of
Page 18 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
death was shock resulting from extensive burns sustained over the
entire body.
In the cross-examination the witness has admitted that
besides the palms and soles of the feet, the entire body of
Rasikbhai was burned.
9.8] Prosecution Witness No. 9 – Ramjibhai Shyamjibhai
Balar, examined at Exhibit 83, was serving as the Principal of Smt.
JivibenBhimjibhai Balar Uttar Buniyadi School. He has stated that
deceased Rasikbhai Nathabhai Lakhani joined the school as an
Assistant Teacher on 01-11-1987 and was being paid a salary of
Rs.750/- per month from November 1987, for which his signatures
were obtained on the vouchers. He has further stated that on 31-
12-1988, as Rasikbhai was to get married, they had given him an
amount of Rs.2,000/-. The witness has deposed that Rasikbhai
Nathabhai Lakhani was residing in the Secretary quarters at village
Bhoringada and, after his marriage, he appeared gloomy. Upon
inquiry, Rasikbhai would tell him that he was not satisfied with the
marriage and that he had entered into the marriage only at the
insistence of his father. He has further stated that interviews were
held on 17-02-1989, wherein the member of the Education Board,
D.R. Korat, remained absent, whereas accused Nos. 1 and 2 and
Page 19 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
Secretary Labhubhai Parshottambhai Balar were present. The
statements regarding the interview were sent in his handwriting on
19-02-1989. He has further stated that on 17-02-1989, interviews
for Teachers, Clerks and Peons were scheduled; however, since
only one candidate had appeared for the post of full-time Teacher
and a minimum of three candidates were required, the interviews
for the full-time Teacher post were not conducted, though
interviews for the posts of Clerk and Peon were held. The witness
has further stated that on 11-03-1989, after school hours,
Rasikbhai Lakhani came to his house and they had tea together.
Thereafter, he went to the house of Rasikbhai Lakhani, where
Rasikbhai’s wife Sardaben had come from Parvadi. He has further
stated that on the next day, i.e. on 12-03-1989, Rasikbhai came to
his house and told him that his wife had gone to Gariyadhar and
invited him to his house. Both of them went to the house,
Rasikbhai, who told him that he felt cheated from all sides and that
his wife was of dark complexion, because of which he feared that
they would have dark-skinned children, and further that his father-
in-law was suffering from leukoderma and his brother in law was
mentally unstable but as he was forced for marriage and was not
getting a job and he expressed his regret for the same. The witness
Page 20 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
has stated that Rasikbhai was very worried about his job and they
sat for some time and thereafter as the electricity had gone, they
went home. At around 08:00 pm, Rasikbhai doused himself with
kerosene and got burnt and thereafter expired at the Civil Hospital,
at Amreli.
The witness has not been cross-examined by the learned
advocate for the accused.
9.9] Prosecution Witness No. 10 – Chhotubhai Nathabhai
Musani examined at Exh: 91 is the Executive Magistrate, who has
recorded the dying declaration of Rasikbhai Nathabhai Lakhani
which is produced at Exh:92. The witness has stated that he
received the Yadi which is produced at Exh: 93 for recording the
dying declaration of Rasikbhai Nathalal Lakhani and he went to
Civil Hospital, Amreli and recorded the dying declaration of
Rasikbhai Nathalal Lakhani, wherein, he had stated that he was
working for two years and giving honorary service in Uttar
Buniyadi Madhyamik Shada and an amount of Rs.50,000/-was
demanded from him to be selected as a Teacher. As he was
financially poor and unable to pay the amount, he was shocked and
he himself had poured kerosene on himself and at that time no one
was present and he got burnt and as could not bear the burns, he
Page 21 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
came out of his room and the persons who were present there
saved him and brought him to the hospital and thereafter he lost
consciousness. The persons who were for the interview had
demanded the amount from him.
In the cross examination by the learned advocate for the
accused, the witness has stated that the patient was in the room
when he had gone to record the dying declaration and he had
asked to all the persons present to leave the room while recording
the dying declaration.
9.10] Prosecution Witness No. 11 – Atmaram Pandurang
Pawar examined at Exh: 111 is the is the Investigating Officer who
has narrated the procedure undertaken during investigation. The
witness has produced the complaint at Exh: 112 and has stated that
the complaint was recorded by Police Inspector E.G.Simpy and as
he had worked with Police Inspector E.G.Simpy, he could
recognize and identify his signature. The witness has also produced
an application received by Police Inspector E.G.Simpy by one
Jawalant Jani dated 28-10-1989 and one letter by Anilbhai Ratilal
Kanabar at Exh: 114.
9.11] Prosecution Witness No. 12 – Shantilal Maganlal Bhatt
examined at Exh:117 was working as the Head Constable at
Page 22 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
Gariyadhar Police Station on 13-03-1989 when he had received the
Yadi from the PSO, Gariyadhar which was received from the
Medical Officer, CHC, Gariyadhar and he had gone to the CHC,
Gariyadhar, at 00:10 Hrs. and had recorded the statement of
Rasikbhai, which is produced at Exh:118. In the statement,
Rasikbhai Nathalal Lakhani had stated that an amount of
Rs.50,000/- as donation was demanded from him by the
interviewers and as he could not arrange for the same, he had
doused himself with kerosene and set himself ablaze and tried to
commit suicide.
In the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the
accused, the witness has stated that he did not inquire about the
condition of the patient from any doctor before recording the
statement of Rasikbhai and while he was recording the statement
of Rasikbhai, no Medical Officer was present. No signature of any
doctor or nurse was taken on the statement and the statement does
not state the time of initiation of recording, the statement and the
time that it concluded.
9.12] Prosecution Witness No. 12 Vinodray Kandas Tilawat
examined at Exh:121 is the ASI, who had investigated the offence
registered against Rasikbhai Nathabai under section 309 of the IPC
Page 23 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
at Liliya Police Station, C.R.No.20 of 1989.
9.13] Prosecution Witness No. 13 – Laljibhai Thakasibhai
examined at Exh: 129 is the uncle of the deceased, who has stated
that the DEO and the other trustees had demanded for an amount
from his nephew Rasikbhai, who was giving his honorary service in
the Bhoringda Bunyadi Maddhyamik Shala as a Teacher but he
does not know what amount was being demanded from him. He
was not being paid any salary and he had given an application to
PSI Liliya which is produced at Exh:122.
In the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the
accused, the witness has stated that he had given the application
after his nephew Rasikbhai had expired after taking the advice of
Advocate Manubhai Thumar. He does not know what amount was
being demanded by the trustees of the school and the application is
in the hand-writing of advocate Manubhai Thumar.
9.14] Prosecution Witness No. 14 – Dinmohammad
Dadubhai Dal examined at Exh:130 is the Head Constable of
Gariyadhar Police Station, who was the PSO and had made the
Janva Jog entry in the station diary. The witness has produced the
Janva Jog entry at Exh: 131 and the extract of the station diary at
Exh:132. In the Janva Jog, it was mentioned that, as per the dying
Page 24 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
declaration, Rasikbhai Nathalal Lakhani stated that he did not
have the amount of Rs.50,000/- to be given as donation for his job
as a teacher and hence he had doused himself with kerosene and
set himself ablaze.
10] Upon a fresh and independent re-appreciation of the
entire oral as well as documentary evidence on record, this Court
finds that the prosecution has failed to establish, beyond
reasonable doubt, the foundational facts necessary to bring home
the charges under Sections 7, 12, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the
Prevention of Corruption Act as well as Section 306 of the IPC
against accused No.3. The case of the prosecution rests upon the
allegation that deceased Rasikbhai Natubhai, who was serving as
an honorary teacher and was aspiring for appointment as a full-
time teacher in Smt. Jiviben Bhimjibhai Balar Uttar Buniyadi
Madhyamik Shala, Bhoringda was subjected to illegal demand of
₹50,000/- by the members of the Selection Committee for
securing such appointment. However, the evidence on record
clearly shows that accused No.3 was neither a member of the
Selection Committee nor connected in any manner with the trust,
the school, or the process of recruitment. The principal
complainant, namely Ambabhai Harkhabhai Savani, who had
Page 25 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
lodged the complaint, expired during trial and therefore the
contents of the complaint remained unproved. Significantly, Police
Inspector E G Shimpi who had recorded the complaint was also not
examined, and the complaint came to be exhibited only through
the Investigating Officer, Atmaram Pandurang Pawar which does
not prove its substantive contents. Even with regard to the alleged
payment of ₹15,000/-, there are material contradictions and
inconsistencies as to whether such payment was made at the house
of accused No.3 or accused No.2, and equally contradictory
versions exist regarding the presence of accused No.3 at the
relevant time. The evidence of PW1 Sharadben Ambabhai Savani,
PW2 Manjibhai Dayalbhai Savani, PW3 Laljibhai
Ranchodbhaibhai Savani and PW4 Babubhai Harjibhai Savani
does not inspire confidence so far as the involvement of accused
No.3 is concerned and fails to establish either any specific demand,
acceptance, participation, or any conduct amounting to instigation,
intentional aid, or active complicity so as to constitute abetment of
suicide under Section 306 IPC. In absence of any cogent, reliable
and legally admissible evidence connecting accused No.3 with the
alleged demand of illegal gratification or with any act of mental
cruelty or harassment proximate enough to have driven the
Page 26 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.A/267/2006 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
deceased to commit suicide, no conviction could have been
recorded. Furthermore, the public servant accused having expired,
and accused No.3 being neither a public servant nor concerned
with the appointment process, the very substratum of the
prosecution case stands considerably weakened. The learned trial
Court has, therefore, rightly appreciated the evidence in its proper
perspective and has committed no error in recording the order of
acquittal. This Court finds no perversity, illegality or infirmity
warranting interference in an appeal against acquittal.
11] The impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed on 15-
09-2005 passed by the learned Special (ACB) Judge, Fast
Track Court No.1, Amreli in Special (ACB) Case No. 10 of
1993, 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)
VISHAL MISHRAPage 27 of 27
Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Tue May 05 2026 Downloaded on : Fri May 08 20:40:38 IST 2026
