{"id":256479,"date":"2008-09-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008"},"modified":"2016-01-26T04:55:35","modified_gmt":"2016-01-25T23:25:35","slug":"jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: A.L.Dave,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.C.Upadhyaya,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/293\/2003\t 2\/ 21\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 293 of 2003\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE\n \n\n  \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nJIVANBHAI\nVITHALBHAI CHAVDA - Appellant\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT - Respondent\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nYOGESH S LAKHANI WITH MR GONDALIA, for\nAppellant. \nMR MUKESH A PATEL, APP, for\nrespondent, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 19\/09\/2008 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)<\/p>\n
\tThe
\nappellant came to be convicted for the offence punishable under
\nSection 376<\/a> of the Indian Penal code by the learned Additional
\nSessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Rajkot by judgment and order dated
\n29th January, 2003 in Sessions Case No.115\/1999. The
\nappellant is sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of ten years and
\nto pay a fine of Rs. 10,000\/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for one
\nyear.\n<\/p>\n
2.\tThe
\nprosecution case, in brief, can be stated thus :\n<\/p>\n
2.1\t\tThe
\nfirst informant Ramaben Dhirajbhai and her husband Dhirajbhai
\nShamjibhai  Chavda were engaged in embroidery work while staying at
\nRajkot. Since the business was not going on well, they thought of
\nconsulting the appellant-accused, who was also working as a priest,
\nbesides serving in Postal Department and staying at Jetpur. P.W.2 ?
\nDhirajbhai Shamjibhai, therefore, contacted Shamjibhai  Karshanbhai
\nto get in touch with the appellant, who, in turn, introduced
\nDhirajbhai to the appellant. After listening to the facts of
\nDhirajbhai, it is the case of the prosecution that the appellant said
\nthat some rituals have to be performed at the residence of
\nDhirajbhai. For that purpose, the appellant, along with Shamjibhai
\nKarshanbhai, went to the house of Dhirajbhai located at Ashapura
\nNagar,  Street No.10\/1, Rajkot. After some time, it is the case of
\nthe prosecution that, Shamjibhai Karshanbhai left and the appellant
\nremained at the house of Dhirajbhai, as rituals were to be performed
\nat night. At about 10.30 p.m. on 24th May, 1998, it is the
\ncase of the prosecution that the appellant took bath. He had insisted
\nthat the rituals were to be performed with the help of the
\nprosecutrix – first informant Ramaben, wife of Dhirajbhai Shamjibhai.
\nShe, therefore, also took bath and both of them went to the
\npooja-room in the house of Dhirajbhai Shamjibhai. It is the case of
\nthe prosecution that the appellant insisted on performing rituals in
\nthat room by remaining alone with the prosecutrix. He, therefore,
\nlocked the door of the pooja-room from inside. The rituals were over
\nby 1.30 a.m. on 25th May, 1998.\n<\/p>\n
2.2\t\tIt
\nis the case of the prosecution that while the appellant and the
\nprosecutrix were alone in the room, the appellant started chanting
\n`Mantras’ and then he made the prosecutrix to drink milk
\nthrice, to which some ash was added. The milk was administered in
\nstainless-steel bowl. It is the case of the prosecutrix that on
\nconsuming the milk, she lost orientation and became almost
\nunconscious. She could only see the accused-appellant. It is her case
\nthat the accused thereafter got rid of the towel, which was the only
\ncloth wrapped around him and then he removed her clothes as well and
\nhad intercourse with her against her will. According to the
\nprosecutrix, she could not resist or speak because of the effect of
\nthe drug administered to her in the milk. She gives the version in
\nthe FIR that she was raped twice. She says that she regained her
\nconsciousness on the next day and on regaining consciousness, she
\ninformed her husband about what was done to her by the
\naccused-appellant.\n<\/p>\n
2.3\t\tAs
\nper the prosecution case, on being informed by the prosecutrix about
\nthe incident, her husband Dhirajbhai Shamjibhai talked to his brother
\nand then both of them went to Shamjibhai Karshanbhai. There they were
\ninsulted by Shamjibhai Karshanbhai and, therefore, they went to a
\nLawyer and got prepared an application addressed to the Commissioner
\nof Police. The said application was tendered to the Commissioner of
\nPolice, but, they were directed to go somewhere-else, where they went
\nand F.I.R. came to be registered against the present appellant and
\nShamjibhai Karshanbhai. On the basis of that F.I.R., investigation
\nwas made and the investigating agency, having found sufficient
\nmaterial against the accused, filed charge sheet against the
\nappellant-accused in the Court of J.M.F.C., Rajkot. The case was
\ncommitted to the Court of Sessions, as the charges levelled against
\nthe accused were triable exclusively by the Court of Sessions and
\nSessions Case No. 115\/1999 came to be registered.\n<\/p>\n
3.\tCharge
\nwas framed against the accused-appellant at Exh. 5.   The accused
\npleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.\n<\/p>\n
3.1\t\tThe
\nSessions Court, after considering the evidence led by the
\nprosecution, explained the circumstances\/evidence against the accused
\nand recorded his statement, below Exh.5-Charge, under Section 313<\/a> of
\nthe Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein the accused stated that he
\nhas been falsely implicated and the allegation is by way of a
\ncounter-blast.\n<\/p>\n
4.\tThe
\nSessions Court, after considering the evidence led by the
\nprosecution, came to the conclusion that the prosecution was
\nsuccessful in establishing the charge of rape and, therefore,
\nrecorded conviction and awarded sentence, as stated above. Aggrieved
\nby the said judgment and order, the present appeal is preferred.\n<\/p>\n
5.\tWe
\nhave heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Yogesh S. Lakhani, appearing
\nwith learned advocate Mr.Gondalia, for the appellant, and Mr.Mukesh
\nA.Patel, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. We have
\nalso examined the record and proceedings.\n<\/p>\n
6.\tLearned
\nSenior Advocate Mr.Lakhani submitted that if the evidence of the
\nprosecution is seen, it is a case of sheer concoction and
\nimagination. He submitted that the deposition of the prosecutrix and
\nher F.I.R. go contrary to each other and create a doubt about the
\nwhole of the prosecution case. It creates doubt about the events and
\nsequence of events. Mr.Lakhani submitted further that the F.I.R. was
\ngiven late by three days. It was given after consulting a legal
\nexpert and getting it typed. Mr. Lakhani further submitted that if
\nthe language employed in the F.I.R. and its tenor are seen, it is
\nclear that it could not have been given by the prosecutrix as it
\npurports to have been done. He submitted that the thumb impression,
\nwhich is affixed below the F.I.R., is not identified by any one. Over
\nand above this fact,  some writing is scored out just beneath the
\nthumb impression, which creates doubt about its authenticity. Mr.
\nLakhani submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged after the complaint was
\nlodged by Shamjibhai Karshanbhai Chavda against the husband of the
\nprosecutrix and his brother and this aspect is not disclosed in the
\nF.I.R. lodged in the present case.\n<\/p>\n
6.1\t\tMr.\n<\/p>\n
Lakhani submitted further that as per the overall evidence of the
\nprosecutrix herself, the bowl, in which she was made to consume milk,
\nallegedly containing diazepam, was washed after the incident and was
\nmade use of before it was seized. This aspect is revealed in the
\npanchnama as well. Mr. Lakhani submitted that in spite of this,
\nF.S.L. report finds presence of diazepam in the bowl and this aspect
\nis not explained. Mr. Lakhani submitted that even the panchnama of
\nseizure indicates that nothing was visibly found in the bowl.\n<\/p>\n
6.2\t\tMr.\n<\/p>\n
Lakhani submitted that there is no evidence whatsoever on the
\nquestion of effect of diazepam, on the quantity required for creating
\neffect alleged by the prosecutrix, time required therefor, test of
\ndiazepam etc.<\/p>\n
6.3\t\tIt
\nis also contended that there is no medical evidence to support the
\ncase of rape.\n<\/p>\n
7.\tOn
\nthe other hand, learned A.P.P. Mr. Patel has opposed this appeal.
\nAccording to him, there is ample evidence to show that the appellant
\nmisused his position as a Priest and committed rape on the
\nprosecutrix under the guise of performing rituals. He submitted that
\nwhen the prosecutrix herself deposes about the occurrence, there is
\nno need to look for corroboration to her evidence. Mr. Patel
\nsubmitted that the nature of crime is heinous and will have a direct
\nimpact on the standard of morality in the society. The trial Court
\nhas recorded conviction on the basis of legally acceptable evidence
\nand the same, therefore, may be confirmed. Mr. Patel submitted that
\nthere is no reason to discard the evidence of F.S.L. Mr. Patel
\nsubmitted that even  in his statement under Section 313<\/a> of Cr.P.C.,
\nthe appellant admits to have administered milk, may be as a
\n`prasadi’, but, the fact remains that he did administer milk.\n<\/p>\n
8.\tWe
\nhave considered rival side submissions. We find that the incident
\noccurred on 24.5.1998 allegedly after 22.30 hours and before 1.30
\nhours on 25.5.1998 in the house of the prosecutrix in the pooja-room.
\nAccording to the prosecutrix, she became almost unconscious upon
\nconsuming milk, which was given to her thrice by the appellant. In
\nthe F.I.R. she says that after this situation arose, the appellant
\nraped her twice after removing his and her clothes in totality. She
\nhas stated in the F.I.R. that she regained consciousness in the next
\nday morning at about 11.00 a.m. and then she informed her husband
\nabout the occurrence. Her husband then talked to his brother and both
\nof them went to Shamjibhai Karshanbhai `to ascertain the truth in the
\nsay of the victim’, where they were ill-treated and abused. They,
\ntherefore, then went to the house of the accused-appellant and upon
\ninquiring about the appellant from the wife of the appellant, the
\nwife asked them not to lodge complaint for the sake of their children
\nand that the appellant is in the habit of committing such acts. By
\nthat time, the appellant arrived at the home and the husband of the
\nprosecutrix asked him as to why did the appellant behave in this
\nmanner with the prosecutrix. He was told by the appellant that this
\nwas a command of Goddess and then said that he has performed such
\nacts at many places and they can do their worst. They, therefore,
\nwent back to Rajkot, talked to relatives and were advised to lodge
\ncomplaint to protect the female folk of the community from such
\nfuture acts.\n<\/p>\n
9.\tIn
\ncomparison of the F.I.R., if the deposition of the prosecutrix
\nrecorded at Exh.22 is seen, she says that since her husband’s
\nbusiness was not going on well, her husband got in touch with the
\nappellant through Shamjibhai Karshanbhai, and the appellant said that
\nhe would perform rituals at his house and accordingly, on the date of
\nthe incident, the appellant came to the house of the prosecutrix
\nalong with Shamjibhai Karshanbhai, who left after sometime. The
\nappellant indicated that the rituals are to be performed at night.
\nHe, therefore, took bath at 10.00 p.m. and as advised by him, the
\nprosecutrix also took bath and then, both of them went to the
\npooja-room. The appellant had only a towel wrapped around his person.
\n The prosecutrix was wearing usual dress  of sari, blouse and
\npetticoat. The appellant insisted that only they both should be in
\nthe pooja-room and nobody should enter the pooja-room. They entered
\nthe pooja-room and then locked it from inside, whereupon the
\nprosecutrix stated that she had never stayed alone with any other
\nmale, whereupon the appellant stated her that there is nothing to
\nworry about it. The appellant called for milk from her. He mixed some
\nmaterial like ash in the milk and started chanting `mantras’.
\nHe made the prosecutrix to consume the milk in small quantity thrice.
\nOn consumption of the milk, according to the prosecutrix, she became
\nnonplussed and she could not see anything, except the appellant. She
\nsays that thereafter the appellant got rid of the towel wrapped
\naround his person and became nude totally. Thereafter, he pushed her
\nto the floor and committed rape. She says that it was a forced
\ncomplete intercourse. Thereafter, he opened the door and went away.
\nShe says that thereafter she and her family had a sleep during the
\nnight, but, she had no capacity to speak. On the next day i.e.
\n25.5.1998 at about 11.00 a.m., she told her husband about the
\nincident. Therefore, her husband and his brother went to the house of
\nthe appellant. They came back from Jetpur and told her that according
\nto the appellant, he acted as per the orders of the Goddess. Her
\nhusband told her that the appellant’s wife told him that the
\nappellant is in the habit of doing so and, therefore, they should not
\ntake any action for the sake of their children and if at all he
\nwants, he himself can have intercourse with her. According to the
\nprosecutrix, they thereafter went to a Lawyer, got the complaint
\nprepared and typed. She affixed her thumb impression on it  and went
\nto the Office of the Police Commissioner, from-where they were
\ndirected to go to some other Office, where they went and lodged
\ncomplaint against the present appellant and Shamjibhai Karshanbhai.\n<\/p>\n
9.1\t\tWhat
\nemerges from her cross-examination is that she admits that the
\nrituals were over at about 1.30 a.m. Of 25.5.1998 and she went out of
\nthe pooja-room and prepared tea, which was taken by the appellant and
\nher mother-in-law. She also admits that she had cleaned the bowl as
\nwell as towel, which was wrapped by the accused against his person.\n<\/p>\n
10.\tIf
\nthe panchnama of recovery of the bowl (Exh.24) is seen, it emerges
\nthat the prosecutrix had stated before the panch- witnesses that the
\nsaid bowl was cleaned by her after the incident and was being used
\nthereafter for the household requirements. It also emerges that the
\nclothes worn by the prosecutrix at the time of the incident were also
\nwashed by the prosecutrix before they were seized under the said
\npanchnama drawn on 30.5.1998 between 17.30 and 18.15 hours. In this
\ncontext, it is recorded in the said panchnama that there were no
\nvisible signs of any intoxicant or other type of substance in the
\nbowl.\n<\/p>\n
10.1\t\tIn
\nthe above context, if the F.S.L. Report (Exh.21) is seen,  it says
\nthat the bowl was tested and diazepam could be detected in the
\ncontents (washing of steel bowl) of  the said exhibit mark `C’, i. e.
\nthe steel bowl allegedly used in the incident.\n<\/p>\n
11.\tWe
\nare unable to reconcile ourselves as to how the FSL report could have
\ndetected the presence of diazepam in the washed bowl when the bowl
\nwas admittedly cleaned after the incident and was being used in the
\nhousehold purposes even thereafter till it was seized after 5 days of
\nthe incident. It is nobody’s case that anybody had any effect of
\ndiazepam after the incident when the bowl was used for the household
\npurpose. The panchnama also says that no substance was found in the
\nbowl and, therefore, we say that we are unable to reconcile with the
\nsituation. The prosecution has not come up with any explanation in
\nthis regard.\n<\/p>\n
12.\tApart
\nfrom this, the FSL report at Exh.31 does not speak of the presence of
\nany blood or semen on the clothes of the prosecutrix.\n<\/p>\n
13.\tNow,
\ngoing to the main incident, it is the case of the prosecutrix that on
\nconsuming the milk given to her by the appellant, in which the
\nappellant had mixed up some ash like powder, she became almost
\nunconscious and could see only the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
13.1\t\tIn
\nthis regard, it is sought to be conveyed by the evidence of FSL that
\nthe appellant had mixed up diazepam in the milk to have that
\nintoxicating or intoxicating type of effect on the prosecutrix, of
\nwhich the appellant took disadvantage and committed rape on her. But,
\nwe do not find any evidence to know the effect of diazepam, the
\nquantity which would be required to be administered for obtaining a
\nparticular effect of the drug, the time that would be taken for the
\nprosecutrix to be influenced by the drug and the time for which the
\nconsumer or the prosecutrix would remain under the influence of the
\ndrug. There is not an iota of evidence in this regard. It is,
\ntherefore, difficult to accept the prosecution case that the
\nappellant by administering drug on the prosecutrix, made her
\nsemi-conscious and took disadvantage of her semi-consciousness.\n<\/p>\n
14.\tThe
\nevidence of the prosecutrix and her version in the F.I.R. run
\ncontrary to each other. In her FIR, she says that she was raped
\ntwice, in her deposition she speaks of forcible coitus
\nonly once.\n<\/p>\n
14.1\t\tShe
\nsays that she became unconscious or semi-conscious  and regained
\nconsciousness only on the next day at about 11.00 a.m., whereafter
\nshe informed her husband about the incident, but, it emerges from her
\ndeposition during the cross-examination that she had come out of the
\nroom along with the appellant, had prepared tea, which was taken by
\nthe appellant as well as her mother-in-law. Therefore, her story that
\nshe became unconscious and regained consciousness only on the next
\nday at about 11.00 a.m. becomes doubtful.\n<\/p>\n
15.\tLikewise,
\nshe says that before the rape was committed, the appellant had
\nremoved her clothes. It is nobody’s case that she was either found
\nlying in the room in that condition when the appellant left the
\npooja-room or that the appellant left pooja-room alone, nor is it
\nanybody’s case that the prosecutrix came out of the pooja-room
\nwithout clothes on her person. Therefore, her story that she became
\nunconscious after consuming milk becomes doubtful.\n<\/p>\n
16.\tIt
\nis also to be noted that the appellant came to the house of the
\nprosecutrix only upon an invitation by her husband and her husband
\nmet the appellant through Shamjibhai Karshanbhai. The allegations are
\nalso levelled against Shamjibhai Karshanbhai, but, for whatever
\nreason, he was not charge sheeted. It is, therefore, not the case of
\nthe prosecution that the appellant, of his own volition, went to the
\nhouse of the prosecutrix for performing rituals and took disadvantage
\nof this situation or that he went to the house of the prosecutrix
\nwith a view to take such disadvantage.\n<\/p>\n
17.\tWe
\nnotice, as is rightly argued by Mr.Lakhani, that the FIR is lodged
\nbelatedly. As per the case of the prosecutrix, she informed her
\nhusband at about 11.00 a.m. on 25.5.1998, whereafter her husband
\ntalked to his brother Ashokbhai, and both of them then, strangely
\nwent to ascertain the truth in the matter and on being ill-treated by
\nthe appellant, came back to Rajkot, consulted the advocate, got the
\ncomplaint drafted and went to the Police Station for lodging the FIR.
\nBut, in fact, if we see, the FIR is lodged on 27.5.1998. Therefore,
\neither the story, which is given by the prosecutrix is not correct or
\nthat the prosecutrix has remained silent or inactive for three days
\ni.e. from 24.5.1998 to 27.5.1998. Either way, the delay would
\ncertainly raise doubt, particularly when there are so many defects
\nfound in the prosecution case, as discussed above.\n<\/p>\n
18.\tWe
\nalso notice that the FIR exh.23, if read, would go to indicate that
\nit was upon dictation or instructions of a male, as can be seen from
\nthe language employed in the FIR and its tenor. It was drafted by an
\nadvocate. It was drafted after an FIR was lodged against the husband
\nof the prosecutrix by Shamjibhai Karshanbhai, and significantly the
\nFIR is silent about that incident. Last but not the least, the FIR
\npurports to contain thumb mark of the prosecutrix, which is not
\nidentified by any one and it is put on some writing, which is scored
\nout. These factors render the FIR itself doubtful.\n<\/p>\n
19.\tThe
\nmedical evidence, so far as rape is concerned, is absolutely `nil’.
\nThe FSL report indicates that there was presence of sperms in the
\nvaginal swab. However, there is no evidence to show that these sperms
\nwere of the group of the appellant and as is rightly observed by the
\ntrial Court, the prosecutrix being married, it could be because of
\nher relationship with her husband. But, the presence of sperms in
\nvaginal swab of the prosecutrix will not advance the case of the
\nprosecution any further towards the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
20.\tIn
\nour view, therefore, the prosecution case is not founded on a firm
\nfooting. The FIR is doubtful, the deposition of the prosecutrix is
\ndoubtful, the FSL report becomes doubtful, the conduct of the
\nprosecutrix and her husband, soon after the incident, is doubtful,
\nthe FIR is belated, there is lack of evidence to know the effect of
\ndiazepam, there is no explanation coming on the question as to how
\nthe bowl could have contained diazepam when it was cleaned and used
\nfor about five days. So, in sum and substance, the very substratum of
\nthe prosecution case loses its credibility. Therefore, the trial
\nCourt, in our view, erred in recording conviction.\n<\/p>\n
21.\t\tFor
\nthe foregoing reasons, we allow this appeal by setting aside the
\njudgment and order of conviction and acquitting the appellant of the
\ncharge levelled against him. Fine, if any, paid to be refunded to the
\nappellant. The appellant be released from jail forthwith, if not
\nrequired in any other case.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[
\nA.L. Dave,J.]<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[
\nJ.C.Upadhyaya,J.]<\/p>\n
(patel)<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008 Author: A.L.Dave,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.C.Upadhyaya,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/293\/2003 2\/ 21 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 293 of 2003 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-256479","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nJivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-25T23:25:35+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"18 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-25T23:25:35+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":3475,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-25T23:25:35+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-25T23:25:35+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"18 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-25T23:25:35+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008"},"wordCount":3475,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008","name":"Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-25T23:25:35+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jivanbhai-vs-state-on-19-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jivanbhai vs State on 19 September, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256479","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=256479"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256479\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=256479"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=256479"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=256479"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}