LAWS(GJH)-2015-1-112

STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAMESHBHAI HARSHADBHAI CHAMPANERIA

Decided On January 05, 2015
STATE OF GUJARAT Appellant
V/S
Rameshbhai Harshadbhai Champaneria Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this appeal, the appellant State has challenged the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.10, Rajpipla, Dated : 16.06.2004, rendered in Sessions Case No. 92 of 2000, whereby, the learned trial Judge acquitted the original accused the opponents, herein, of the charges for the offence punishable under Sections 332, 323, 504, 506(2) read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(10) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case of the prosecution, as set out before the trial Court, are that a complaint was given by the original complainant, wherein, it is stated that on the date of the alleged incident, i.e. on on 18.11.1999, while he was on his duty as a postman and was distributing the posts, all the original accused -opponents, herein, picked -up a quarrel with him saying as to where did he throw away a cheque for the amount of Rs.10,000/ -. Then, all the accused beat -up the complainant and also hurled filthy abuses at him, regarding his caste. Hence, the complainant lodged the complaint in question. On registration of the complaint, police carried out the investigation into the matter and on finding sufficient evidence filed charge -sheet against the accused -opponents, herein.

(3.) BEFORE the trial Court, since, all the accused pleaded not guilty, the case was committed for trial. At the time of trial, the prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined as many as 11 witnesses. The prosecution also produced documentary evidence in the form of panchnama of place of offence, caste certificate of the complainant, medical certificate of the complainant etc. The trial Court, then, after recording the evidence of the witnesses and perusing the material on record passed the impugned order of acquittal. Hence, the present appeal.