STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. JAYDIPSINH GIRVATSINH HATHESINH CHAVDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dtd. 28/2/2020 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar at Kalol in Sessions Case No.23 of 2018 for the offences under Sec. 394 , 323 , 324 , 427 , 504 , 506(2) of IPC and also u/s 135 of the G.P. Act, the applicant - State of Gujarat has preferred this application to grant leave to appeal as provided under sec. 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the Code" for short).

(2.) Briefly stated, it is the case of complainant Chintu Desai that on 22/7/2016 at about 22:00 hrs., the complainant scolded respondent No.2 regarding cutting of cable wire and therefore, respondent No.2 got excited and gave filthy abuses to the complainant and called other co-accused. At that time, accused Nos.1 and 4 gave blow of dhoka to the complainant and prosecution witnesses and accused No.3 gave knife blow to witness and thereby, caused injury on both the hands and accused No.4 snatched away golden chain weighing one tola valued at Rs.20,000.00. It is further alleged in the complaint that during the course of incident, cash of Rs.4000.00 was fallen down and accused persons also gave kick and fist blows to the complainant and prosecution witnesses and adminstered threat to cause death and thereby, committed breach of notification issued by the District Magistrate under the Gujarat Police Act. Therefore, complaint in this regard was lodged before the PI, Kalol City Police Station, which was registered as I - C.R. No.81 of 2016 for the offences under Sec. 394 , 323 , 324 , 427 , 504 , 506(2) of IPC and also u/s 135 of the G.P. Act.

(3.) In pursuance of the complaint lodged by the complainant, investigating agency recorded statements of the witnesses, collected relevant evidence in form of various Panchnamas, relevant medical evidence and other evidence. After having found material against the respondents accused, charge-sheet came to be filed in the Court of learned JMFC, Kalol. As said Court lacks jurisdiction to try the offence, it committed the case to the Sessions Court, Kalol as provided under sec. 209 of the Code.