Gujarat High Court High Court

State vs Chandubhai on 26 August, 2011

Gujarat High Court
State vs Chandubhai on 26 August, 2011
Author: A.L.Dave, Honourable K.M.Thaker,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.MA/4625/2010	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 4625 of 2010
 

In


 

CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 739 of 2010
 

With


 

CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 739 of 2010
 

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

 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

CHANDUBHAI
ZAVERBHAI VANKAR - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
AJ DESAI, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 01/12/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)

The
State has come with this application seeking leave to appeal to
challenge the judgment and order rendered by the Sessions Court,
Vadodara, in Sessions Case No.128/2009, on 30.1.2010.

2. The
respondent was charged with the offences punishable under Sections
504 & 506(2) of IPC and was tried therefor. The trial Court found
that the witnesses to the incident have not deposed about the exact
words uttered by the respondent so as to constitute the offences
punishable under Sections 504 & 506(2) IPC.

3. Upon
going through the evidence provided to us by the learned A.P.P, we
find that the observations made by the trial Court are factually
correct. When the offence alleged against the accused is of making
some utterance constituting an offence, it is incumbent upon the
prosecution to prove those exact words to have been uttered by the
accused. The prosecution having failed to do so, the trial Court is
justified in recording acquittal of the respondent. We, therefore,
refuse leave to appeal. The application stands disposed of
accordingly.

4. The
appeal would also stand disposed of in light of refusal of leave to
appeal.

[A.L.Dave,J.]

[K.M.Thaker,J.]

(patel)

   

Top