STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. RAMESHBHAI BABARBHAI TADPADA VAGHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above referred Criminal Appeal is preferred by the appellant State of Gujarat under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order pronounced by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Nadiad on 15.05.2004 in Sessions Case No.296/1997.

(2.) ACCORDING to the brief facts of the case Anti Dacoity Squad, P.S.I. Mr.H.B.Chavda and P.S.I. Mr.J.B.Gohil of Umreth Police Station were on patrolling near Bhalej Cross Road at about 4.40 p.m., they found suspicious movement of a person and, therefore, the said person was accosted by the police and on inquiring, he gave his name to be Rameshbhai Babarbhai Tadpada Vaghari resident of Sardarpura, who is original accused No.1 respondent No.1 herein. A search on the person of accused No.1 was carried out and one leather wallet was found from the pocket of the pant of Rameshbhai Babarbhai. From the said wallet, two coins were found of silver and two small chits were found. About these two coins and chits, Rameshbhai Babarbhai failed to give proper explanation to the police and, therefore, he was arrested under the provisions of Section 41(1)(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and muddamal was seized. A Station Diary No.13 of 1995 was made in the Police Station and P.S.I., Mr.H. B. Chavda proceeded to inquire in the matter. On 26.04.1995, further 39 coins of silver were found from the house of Rameshbhai Babarbhai, which were seized. During this inquiry, on 01.05.1995, complainant Prakashbhai Chimanlal Thakor gave his complaint before Senior P.S.I., Umreth Police Station against Rameshbhai Babarbhai stating that before one month of 01.05.1995, complainant and one Munnabhai had been to Sardarpura on an information that in that area silver coins were available for purchase. Munnabhai had acquaintance with Rameshbhai Babarbhai and, therefore, both of them visited Rameshbhai Babarbhai at his village and Rameshbhai Babarbhai took them to his field. Rameshbhai Babarbhai on inquiring stated that he and his brother had about 20,000 silver coins each costing about Rs.70/ - to Rs.80/ - at market rate. Rameshbhai Babarbhai stated that since he wanted to purchase land, he intended to sell those silver coins for less amount. After negotiations, complainant and accused Rameshbhai Babarbhai and accused Thakorbhai Babarbhai came to a decision that complainant Prakashbhai might purchase silver coins at the cost of RS.40/ - each. Accused Rameshbhai Babarbhai demanded Rs.10,000/ - for deposit and stated that on depositing the said payment, the deal would be made final for silver coins in quantity as might be desired by the complainant. Prakashbhai, complainant stated that he would return after 2 -3 days with amount and he wanted 500 coins. Even Rameshbhai Babarbhai had shown them a bag full of silver coins and handed over two coins to the complainant for verification. There were 5 -7 persons in the field, at that time, when this negotiation took place. According to the complainant, thereafter two coins handed over to them by the accused, were got tested and verified and were found of silver and, thereafter, Prakashbhai had delivered Rs.10,000/ - to accused Rameshbhai Babarbhai and accused had assured that on the amount of 500 coins being given to him, he would deliver silver coins. On 01.05.2005, again complainant came to Sardarpura to visit Rameshbhai Babarbhai and came to know that Rameshbhai Babarbhai was in police custody and coins were seized by the police and, therefore, the offence was registered vide C.R.No.89/1995 against the present six respondents for the charges punishable under Sections 420, 120 -B, 251 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. P.S.I. Mr.H.B.Chavda investigated the offence and filed the charge -sheet against the accused. The case was, thereafter, committed to the Court of Sessions and was made over to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Nadiad. Vide Ex.5 on 13.10.2003, the trial Court framed charges for the above offences against the respondents to which they pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses and produced on record necessary documents. The learned trial Judge recorded the statements of the accused, thereafter and heard both the parties and came to the conclusion to acquit the accused for the above said offences and hence, this appeal.

(3.) LEARNED APP Mr.Dipen A. Desai, for the appellant State of Gujarat was heard in great detail in respect of this appeal at this juncture also. We have summoned Record and Proceedings from the trial Court and we have gone through the same thoroughly. We have, at this juncture also, examined vital features of the case and reasonable probability arising out of the circumstances of the evidence recorded during the trial. We have scanned reasons assigning by the trial Court. We have also re -appreciated the evidence as recorded during the trial.