Gujarat High Court High Court

State vs Bharatkumar on 11 November, 2008

Gujarat High Court
State vs Bharatkumar on 11 November, 2008
Author: Ravi R.Tripathi,&Nbsp;Honourable H.Shukla,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/1160/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 1160 of 2008
 

In


 

CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 613 of 2008
 

 
 
=========================================


 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

BHARATKUMAR
CHANDULAL KOTHARI & 6 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================
 
Appearance : 
PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for Applicant(s) : 1, 
None for
Respondent(s) : 1 - 7. 
=========================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 11/11/2008 

 

 
 


 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI)

The
present application is filed for seeking leave to appeal against
judgment and order dated 26.10.2007 of acquittal passed by the
learned Presiding Officer and Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions
Case No.5 of 1999.

Heard
learned A.P.P. Mr. Raval.

The
learned A.P.P.Mr. Raval has strenuously submitted that the learned
Presiding Officer and Additional Sessions Judge has committed an
error in recording acquittal in the matter of offence under section
143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 324 of Indian Penal Code read with section
3(1)(10) of Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989. The learned A.P.P.
submitted that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has committed an
error in recording acquittal on appreciating the evidence.

The
Court having perused the judgment and order finds that the evidences
of the Investigating Officer and the complainant were contrary to
each other. Not only that there was no other evidence which supports
the case of the complainant.

In
view of above, the Court finds no substance in the present
application. Hence, this application is rejected.

[RAVI
R. TRIPATHI, J.]

[RAJESH
H. SHUKLA, J.]

jani

   

Top