LAWS(GJH)-2025-12-37

STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. DHARMENDRASINH NAVALSINH JADEJA

Decided On December 02, 2025
STATE OF GUJARAT Appellant
V/S
Dharmendrasinh Navalsinh Jadeja Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeal is preferred by the Appellant State under Sec. 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order dtd. 22/3/2010, passed by the learned Special Judge Jamnagar, in Special Criminal Case No.7 of 2007, recording the acquittal of the respondents for the offences punishable under Sec. 323, 504 and 352 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sec. 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

(2.) The brief facts of the prosecution are that on 1/9/2006, at about 23.30 hours, at village Lalpur, the accused went to the house of complainant, situated in Chamarvas and inquired about Chanabhai, from whom he wanted to recover his unpaid money and insulted the complainant with an intention to provoke and breach public peace and suddenly attacked her without any reason, caused hurt to her by inflicting fist blows and gave filthy abuses against her caste, thus the accused committed an offence in question for which the complaint came to be registered against the accused. On the basis of said complaint, investigation was initiated and after thorough investigation as there was sufficient evidence against the accused, charge-sheet was filed against him before the Court. As the offence was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, as per the provisions of Sec. 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and thereafter charge was framed against the accused persons and the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. To prove the case, the prosecution has examined 6 witnesses as well as produced various documentary evidence on record. At conclusion of the Trial, the learned Trial Judge acquitted the accused person. Being aggrieved by the same, the State has preferred the present Appeal.

(3.) Heard learned APP Mr.Yuvraj Brahmbhatt for the appellant-State and learned advocate Ms.Sneha Joshi for the respondent-original accused.