Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.MA/8425/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
MISC.APPLICATION No. 8425 of 2010
In
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 1275 of 2010
=====================================
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Applicant(s)
Versus
JAGJIVAN
GANESHBHAI PATEL & 4 - Respondent(s)
=====================================
Appearance
:
MR KARTIK PANDYA, APP for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR VD PARGHI for Respondent(s) : 1 -
5.
=====================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE P. P. BHATT
Date
: 06/04/2011
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI)
1.0 Present
application is filed by the State of Gujarat through the Public
Prosecutor seeking Leave to Appeal against judgment and order dated
15th December 2009, passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge and Special Judge, 1st Fast Track Court,
Panchmahals at Godhra in Special Case No. 4 of 2001 (ACB).
2.0 The
learned Additional Public Prosecutor strenuously submitted that the
learned Judge has committed an error in recording acquittal of all
the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 408, 409, 420,
468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 7 of the
Prevention of Corruption Act by giving them benefit of doubt.
2.1 The
learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that if the learned
Judge had appreciated the evidence in its true perspective, the
learned Judge would not have erred in recording acquittal. The
learned Additional Public Prosecutor invited the attention of the
Court to the relevant deposition, more particularly, where the case
is that, a person was died a month before, even his thumb impression
is obtained on a statement that he has received the Buffalo.
Similarly, a person, who is educated, his Statement with thumb
impression is sought to be relied upon to contend before the Court
that he has also received Buffalo. The learned Additional Public
Prosecutor submitted that the matter requires consideration so as to
see that a message goes to the people that the benefits, which flow
from the Government policies, must go to the persons for whom, the
benefits are meant for.
2.2 The
learned Additional Public Prosecutor also invited the attention of
the Court to different grounds, which are set out in the Appeal Memo.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor pressed into service the
relevant grounds and requested that he matter be considered by this
Court.
3.0 Rule.
Learned advocate Mr. Parghi for the respondents waives service of
the process of Rule.
4.0 On
perusal of the judgment and order and on perusal of the grounds set
out in the Appeal Memo, this Court is of the opinion that, the matter
requires consideration. Hence, this application is allowed. Leave
to appeal is granted. Rule is made absolute.
[
Ravi R. Tripathi, J. ]
[
P. P. Bhatt, J. ]
hiren
Top