BHAGABHAI MERAGBHAI VADHER Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-accused No.1 of the Atrocities Case No.18/2005, was tried before the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Veraval along with two other accused for the offence punishable under Ss. 332, 186, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act (for short 'B.P. Act') and Sec. 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "Atrocities Act"). 1.1 By a judgment and order dtd. 13/3/2007, the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Veraval acquitted accused Nos.2 and 3, while convicted appellant-accused No.1 under Sec. 332 IPC with sentence of three years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.5,000.00 fine with default stipulation of six months rigorous imprisonment and under Sec. 186 of the IPC, three months rigorous imprisonment and Rs.500.00 fine and in default of payment of fine fifteen days rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The appellant-accused No.1, has given the challenge to the judgment and order under Sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), on the ground that the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Trial Court Judge is unjust, arbitrary and contrary to the materials on record and that there are serious contradiction in the evidence led by the prosecution and that the evidence of the prosecution witness does not draw the ingredients of Ss. 332 and 186 IPC to establish the offence against the appellant.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Devansh Kakkad with learned advocate Mr. Denish V.Mavadhiya for the appellant submitted that the complainant himself has not supported the case of the prosecution. Advcoate Mr. Kakkad stated that the complainant's evidence would suggest that there was no such intention of the accused to deter the complainant from his public duty or to obstruct him in performance of his duties.