{"id":88420,"date":"1995-08-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1995-08-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995"},"modified":"2018-10-15T20:33:09","modified_gmt":"2018-10-15T15:03:09","slug":"bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995","title":{"rendered":"Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & … vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & … vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1995 AIR 2505, \t\t 1995 SCC (5) 602<\/div>\n
Author: M M.K.<\/div>\n
Bench: Mukherjee M.K. (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nBHARWAD JAKSHIBHAI NAGJIBHAI & ORS.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE STATE OF GUJARAT\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT24\/08\/1995\n\nBENCH:\nMUKHERJEE M.K. (J)\nBENCH:\nMUKHERJEE M.K. (J)\nNANAVATI G.T. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1995 AIR 2505\t\t  1995 SCC  (5) 602\n JT 1995 (6)   275\t  1995 SCALE  (4)791\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
\t\t\t    WITH
\n\t       CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 382 OF 1989
\nArvindbhai Kanjibhai Patel
\nVersus
\nBharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & Ors.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t      J U D G M E N T
\nM.K. MUKHERJEE, J.\n<\/p>\n
     Fifteen persons  were  put\t up  for  trial\t before\t the
\nAdditional Sessions  Judge, Ahmedabad  (Rural) at  Narol for
\nrioting\t with  deadly  weapons,\t committing  the  murder  of
\nGovindbhai Girdharbhai\tand attempting to commit the murders
\nof Arvind  Kumar Kanjibhai  and Vinodchandra  Keshavlal. The
\ntrial Judge  acquitted them of all the charges and aggrieved
\nthereby the  State of  Gujarat preferred an appeal. The High
\nCourt admitted\tthe appeal  against seven out of the fifteen
\nacquitted and  dismissed it summarily as regards others. The
\nappeal was ultimately allowed and all the seven accused were
\nconvicted under\t Sections 148  and 326 read with section 149
\nIPC  for  causing  grievous  hurt  to  Govindbhai.  For\t the
\ninjuries caused\t to Arvind  and\t Vinod\tsome  of  them\twere
\nconvicted under\t sections  324\tand  326  IPC  (mimoliciter)
\nrespectively and  the rest  with the aid of Section 149 IPC.
\nFor the above convictions rigorous imprisonment ranging from
\n1 to  3 years  and fines  were imposed with a direction that
\nthe substantive\t sentences shall run concurrently. Assailing
\ntheir convictions and sentences the seven accused have filed
\none of\tthese two  appeals (Criminal Appeal No.381 of 1989).
\nThe other  appeal (Criminal  Appeal No.382 of 1989) has been
\nfiled by Arvind for setting aside the acquittal of the seven
\naccused in  respect of the charges under section 302\/149 and
\n307\/149\t (two\tcounts)\t and   convicting  them\t thereunder;
\nalternatively, for  enhancement of  their sentences  for the
\nconvictions recorded  against them  by the  High Court. Both
\nthe appeals  have been heard together and this judgment will
\ndispose of them.\n<\/p>\n
     Bereft of details the prosecution case is as under:
\n     In December,  1980 there was an election of Bavla Nagar
\nPanchayat which\t was mainly  contested by  two\tgroups,\t one
\nconsisting of  the members  of the Bharwad community and the
\nother of  Patels. In that election success of the Patels was
\nmore pronounced\t than that  of the  Bharwads. Since then the
\nrelations between  the two  communities, who  reside in\t two
\nseparate localities,  in the town of Bavla were strained. On
\nJune 2,\t 1981 at  or about  6 P.M. about 40 to 50 members of
\nthe Bharwad  community, including  the accused persons, came
\nout of their locality armed with deadly weapons like sticks,
\ndharias and farsis and proceeded towards the market shouting
\nthat they  would beat  and kill\t the members  of  the  Patel
\ncommunity. With\t that object  in view  they  attacked  three
\npersons of  Patel community  in succession. The first attack
\nwas on\tGovindbhai who, owing to the injuries inflicted upon
\nhim, expired on the following day, that is, on June 3, 1981.
\nThe second  attack was\ton Arvind  who\tsaved  his  life  by
\nentering into the shop of one Bipinbhai. Lastly the mob went
\nto the shop of Vinod, dragged him out and assaulted him.\n<\/p>\n
     Immediately after\the was\tassaulted,  Arvind  went  to
\nPolice Station\tand lodged an information about the same. On
\nthat information  Sub-Inspector Chauhan\t (PW  12)  of  Bavla
\nPolice Station\tregistered a case and took up investigation.
\nArvind\tand  the  other\t two  injured  were  taken  to\tV.S.
\nHospital,  Ahmedabad   and  admitted   therein.\t As  it\t was
\nsubsequently revealed  that the\t assaults on  Govindbhai and
\nVinod were  parts of  the  same\t transaction,  S.I.  Chauhan
\ncarried out  a joint  investigation in\trespect of  all\t the
\nthree  assaults\t  and  on   completion\t thereof   submitted
\nchargesheet.\n<\/p>\n
     The  accused-appellants   pleaded\tnot  guilty  to\t the
\ncharges levelled  against them\tand asserted  that they\t had
\nbeen falsely implicated.\n<\/p>\n
     To bring home the charges levelled against the accused-
\nappellants, the\t prosecution examined the two injured Arvind
\n and Vinod , Bipinbhai (PW 5). Anil Kumar
\nand Natwarbhai\t(PW 7)\tas eye witnesses to prove one or the
\nother  episode\t of  the  entire  incident.  Besides,  other
\nwitnesses including  doctors, were  examined to\t corroborate
\ntheir evidence.\t No witness was, however, examined on behalf
\nof the defence.\n<\/p>\n
     The learned  trial Judge discussed the evidence adduced
\nby the\tprosecution and\t concluded that\t none  of  the\teye-
\nwitnesses could\t be relied  upon. The High Court in its turn
\nreappraised the evidence and held that findings of the trial
\nJudge were perverse.\n<\/p>\n
     Mr. Ramaswamy,  the learned  counsel appearing  for the
\naccused-appellants criticised the judgment of the High Court
\non the\tground that it ought not have set aside the judgment
\nof the\ttrial Judge  merely because  a different view of the
\nevidence could\tbe taken, more so, when the latter was based
\non a  detailed and proper discussion and appreciation of the
\nevidence. The  other contention\t of Mr.\t Ramaswamy was\tthat
\neven if\t it was assumed that the High Court was justified in
\nsetting aside  the acquittal  it was not at all justified to
\nconvict\t the   accused-appellants  under  Sections  326\t IPC
\nsimpliciter or\twith the  aid of Section 149 IPC as from the
\nevidence of  the eye-witnesses\tand  the  doctors  the\tonly
\nconclusion that\t could be drawn was that the accused persons
\nshared the common object of committing the offence of simple
\nhurt punishable\t either under  Section 323  IPC or, at best,
\nunder Section  324 IPC.\t In that  view of  the\tmatter,\t Mr.
\nRamaswamy  submitted,\tthe  convictions   of  the  accused-
\nappellants were\t liable to be accordingly altered and having
\nregard to  the fact  that since\t the offences were allegedly
\ncommitted more\tthan fourteen  years had elapsed and each of
\nthe accused appellants had already served about 10 months of
\nimprisonment the  substantive  sentence\t imposed  upon\tthem
\nmight be reduced to the period already undergone.\n<\/p>\n
     Mr. Lalit,\t the learned counsel appearing in support of
\nthe appeal  preferred by Arvind, on the other hand contended
\nthat having  reversed the order of acquittal for justifiable
\nreasons, the High Court ought to have convicted the accused-
\nappellants under  Section 302  read with Section 149 IPC for
\ncausing the  death of Govindbhai. According to Mr. Lalit the
\nfacts and  circumstances leading  to the death of Govindbhai
\nunmistakably proved  that the  common object of the unlawful
\nassembly was  to commit\t his  murder  and  consequently,  as
\nmembers of  the\t unlawful  assembly,  each  of\tthe  accused
\npersons was  liable to\tbe convicted  under Section 302 read
\nwith Section 149 IPC. To bring home his contention Mr. Lalit
\nsubmitted that\tthe evidence  on record\t clearly established
\nthat to\t wreak their  vengeance the accused-appellants along
\nwith other  members of their community and armed with deadly
\nweapons covered\t a distance  of about  4 kms. and recknessly
\nand brutally assaulted three members of the Patel community,
\none of\twhom was  dragged out  of his  shop. Mr. Lalit urged
\nthat when  those facts\tand circumstances were considered in
\nthe light  of the  injuries sustained by Govindbhai the only
\nconclusion that could be drawn was that the common object of
\nthe unlawful  assembly was  to commit murder. Mr. Lalit next
\nurged that even if it was held that the common object of the
\nunlawful assembly  was to cause grievous hurt to Govindbhai,
\nat least, the accused-appellant Nos. 1 and 2 namely, Bharwad
\nJakshibhai Nagjibhai  and Bharwad  Bhikhabhai Nathabhai must
\nbe held\t to be guilty of the offences under Section 302 read
\nwith Section  34 IPC  as the injuries caused by them with an
\niron ringed  stick and\tdhariya respectively resulted in his
\ndeath. Mr.  Lalit lastly submitted that in case the findings
\nof the High Court regarding the nature of offences committed
\nby the\taccused-appellants were\t to be held unexceptionable,
\nthe sentence  of imprisonment  for 3  years imposed  for the
\nconviction under  Section 326  IPC for assault on Govindbhai
\nwas wholly  inadequate. Needless to say, the learned counsel
\nappearing for the State supported the entire judgment of the
\nHigh Court.\n<\/p>\n
     Law is  now  well\tsettled\t that  though  the  Code  of
\nCriminal Procedure does not make any distinction between the
\npowers of the Appellate court while dealing with an order of
\nconviction or  of acquittal,  normally the  Appellate  Court
\ndoes not  disturb an  order of acquittal in a case where two
\nviews of the evidence are reasonably possible. But the above
\nprinciple of  is not  applicable where\tthe approach  of the
\ntrial Judge  in dealing\t with  the  evidence  is  manifestly
\nerroneous and  the conclusions drawn are wholly unreasonable
\nand perverse.  In the  instant case  we find  that the\tHigh
\nCourt was fully conscious, and did not transgress the bounds
\nof its\tappellate powers  while dealing\t and  reversing\t the
\norder of acquittal.\n<\/p>\n
     As already\t noticed the  prosecution case\twas that the
\nsuccessive assaults  on Govindbhai,  Arvind and\t Vinod\twere
\nparts of  the same  transaction and  outcome of\t one and the
\nsame common  object and not isolated incidents. Surprisingly
\nhowever, the  trial Judge  appraised the evidence of the eye
\nwitnesses  treating   the  three  incidents  of\t assault  as
\ndistinct and  unconnected with\teach other.  The High  Court
\nwas, therefore,\t fully justified in observing that the basic
\napproach of  the trial Judge in appreciating the prosecution
\nevidence was absolutely erroneous, as it proceeded as if the
\nthree assaults were for different motives or common objects.\n<\/p>\n
     With the  above observation,  the High  Court posed the
\nbasic question\tas to  whether the  prosecution succeeded in
\nproving that  40-50 members  of Bharwad\t community formed an
\nunlawful assembly  and considering  the evidence  of the eye
\nwitnesses answered  it in  the affirmative.  The High  Court
\nalso observed  that  even  the\tdefence\t did  not  seriously
\nchallenge the  above part  of the  prosecution case and that
\nthe learned  counsel  appearing\t for  the  accused  did\t not
\ndispute that  question. Before\tus also Mr. Ramaswamy in his
\nusual fairness\tdid not\t also  join  issue  with  the  above
\nfinding of the High Court.\n<\/p>\n
     The next  question, which\tthe High  Court took  up for
\nconsideration, was whether the seven appellants were members
\nof the\tunlawful assembly. In dealing with this question and
\nanswering the  same in\tfavour of  the prosecution  the High
\nCourt first set out at length the basic principles the trial
\nJudge was  generally required to follow for appreciating the
\nevidence of  eye witnesses  and particularly  of injured eye
\nwitnesses after\t culling the same from the judgments of this
\nCourt in  Appabhai vs.\tState of  Gujarat (AIR<\/a>\t1988 SC 696,
\nBhoginbhai Hirjibhai vs. State of Gujarat (AIR<\/a> 1983 SC 753),
\nSohrab vs.  State of  M.P. (AIR\t 1972 SC  2020) and State of
\nU.P. vs.  Anil Singh (AIR<\/a> 1988 SC 1998). The High Court then
\ndiscussed the  evidence of  the eye  witnesses threadbare in
\nthe  light  of\tother  evidence\t and,  after  detailing\t the
\nsignificant departures\tthe  trial  Judge  made\t from  those
\nprinciples, concluded  that he\twas not\t at all justified in
\ndiscarding their evidence.\n<\/p>\n
     To appreciate  whether the above conclusion of the High
\nCourt is  sustainable or  not we have carefully gone through
\nthe entire  evidence on\t record. Having done so we find that
\nthe  High   Court  was\tfully  justified  in  reversing\t the
\nacquittal as  the trial\t Judge’s approach in appreciation of
\nevidence was  patently wrong  and perverse.  While  on\tthis
\npoint we  may also mention that some of the reasons given by
\nthe trial  Judge are  of such flimsy character that they did
\nnot merit  any consideration in the appellate Court. Besides
\nthe trial  Judge was  not at  all justified  in relying upon
\nminor  discrepancies   regarding  details   to\tdiscard\t the
\nevidence of  the eye  witnesses which the High Court noticed
\nand rightly  ignored. However, to avoid prolixity we refrain
\nfrom detailing\tor discussing  the perverse  findings of the
\ntrial Judge  more particularly\twhen we\t find the High Court
\nhas dealt with them properly and exhaustively.\n<\/p>\n
     Now that  we have\tfound that  the finding\t of the High
\nCourt that  the seven  accused-appellants were members of an
\nunlawful assembly  which caused injuries to three members of
\nthe  Patel   community\tis  unassailable  we  have  to\tnext
\nascertain, keeping in view the respective contentions of the
\nlearned counsel appearing in support of the appeals, whether
\nthe finding  of the  High Court\t  that\tthe common object of
\nthat assembly  was in cause grievous hurt- and not to commit
\nmurder is  correct or  not. In arriving at the above finding
\nthe High Court observed:\n<\/p>\n
     “In our  view looking at to the evidence
\n     on record\tas it  stands,\tit  would  be
\n     difficult\tto   infer  that  the  common
\n     object of\tthe unlawful  assembly was to
\n     kill members  of the Patel community. In
\n     any  set  of  circumstances  benefit  of
\n     doubt is  required to  be given  to  the
\n     accused because  of  different  versions
\n     given by different witnesses with regard
\n     to the  words uttered  by the members of
\n     the unlawful  assembly. Further the fact
\n     that the  dharia blow  is not given by a
\n     share edge\t to the\t deceased and witness
\n     Arvindbhai and  also no  fatal injury is
\n     caused by\tdharia\tto  witness  Vinubhai
\n     suggests that  their common  object  was
\n     not to  kill members of Patel Community.
\n     P.W. 7  Natwarlal Mangaldas  has deposed
\n     that members  of the  unlawful  assembly
\n     were  uttering   “beat  the   Patels  on
\n     Sight”. Same  is the  version  given  by
\n     witness Dahyabhai.\t Same is  the version
\n     given  by\t injured  witness   Vinubhjai
\n     Keshavlal Patel.  From this it cannot be
\n     definitely stated that the common object
\n     of this  unlawful assembly\t was to\t kill
\n     any members  of the Patel community, but
\n     it can  be safely\tinferred  that\ttheir
\n     common object  was to  belabor and\t beat
\n     members of\t the Patel community. In this
\n     view of  the matter,  in  our  view  the
\n     respondents  i.e.\t the   accused\t Nos.
\n     1,2,5,7,9,10 and  13 who  are members of
\n     unlawful assembly and identified as such
\n     by the  witnesses and  whose presence at
\n     the scene\tof offence  is proved  beyond
\n     reasonable doubt  would be\t liable to be
\n     punished for  the offence\tunder Section
\n     326 read  with Sec.  149 of  the  Indian
\n     Penal  Code   in  view  of\t injuries  to
\n     deceased Govindbhai.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Since the\tnature,\t number\t and  location\tof  injuries
\ninflicted are  some of\tthe indicia  to ascertain the common
\nobject, and  for that matter the offences committed. It will
\nbe appropriated at this stage to detail the medical evidence
\nadduced during\tthe trial.  It appears\tfrom the evidence of
\nDr.  Vijay   Ratilal  Sheth   (PW  13)\twho  first  examined
\nGovindbhai  in\tthe  hospital  that  he\t had  the  following
\ninjuries on his person:\n<\/p>\n
(i) bleeding from nose and right ear.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) contused  lacerated would\t5 ”  ” 1″  : 1\/2  over right
\noccipital region.\n<\/p>\n
(iii) bruside B”  ” 2″ over back of right thigh.\n<\/p>\n
(iv) swelling over righ makills 3″ “3\n<\/p>\n
(v) a bruise over right forearm and\n<\/p>\n
(vi) fissure  fracture\tof  right  parietal  bone.  and\t the
\npostmortem examination\treport of  Dr. Mukesh\tShah (PW 11)
\nshows that  besides the above external injuries the deceased
\nhad the following internal injuries:\n<\/p>\n
(i) huge  neamotoma over  the scale over occioital and right
\nparietal region.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) fracture  of right\t parental and  right temporal  bones
\nwith a\tsecond fracture of anterior canal fosse on rightside
\njust near the midline and.\n<\/p>\n
(iii)  diffused\t  subdural  and\t subdural  and\tsubrachnquid
\nnasemorrnage. with brain congested.\n<\/p>\n
     According to  both the octars the injuries found on the
\nperson of  the deceased\t were possible\tby  hard  and  blunt
\nsubstance.\n<\/p>\n
     So far  as the  injuries on  the other  two victims are
\nconcerned Dr.  Seth  stated  that Arvindbhat had the
\nfollowing injuries on his person;\n<\/p>\n
(i) contused  lacerated would  4″ ” 1\/2 ” over right frontal
\nregion\n<\/p>\n
(ii) contused  lacerated wound\t3″ ”  1\/2 ”  “1\/2” over left
\noccipital region.\n<\/p>\n
(iii) contused lacerated wound 3″ ” 1\/4 ” ” 1\/4 ” on base of
\nleft thumb and\n<\/p>\n
(iv) tenderness over the left forearm and the left knee.\n<\/p>\n
     The other\tinjured Vinodchandra  was  examined  by\t Dr.
\nKirit Shukia  \tand  his  examination  revealed\t the
\nfollowing injuries on his person:\n<\/p>\n
(i) contused lacerated wound on forenead 5″ 1\/2″ “1\/2”\n<\/p>\n
(ii) contused lacerated wound over accipital region “1\/2 ” ”
\n1\/2 ”  ” 1\/2\n<\/p>\n
(iii) cupils of both eyes were equally reacting to light.\n<\/p>\n
(iv) rounded bruises over caest.\n<\/p>\n
(v) bruise on front of abdomen 6″ ” 1 ” and 6″ ” 1″.\n<\/p>\n
(vi)  tenderness   over\t right\tforearm\t and  wrist  with  a
\nfracture.\n<\/p>\n
(vii) pointed wound over left leg 1″ 1 cm and\n<\/p>\n
(viii) tenderness over left heel.\n<\/p>\n
     Considering the  nature of\t injuries inflicted  on\t the
\nabove three persons and the discrepancy about the utterances
\nof the\tmob we are the complete agreement with the reasoning
\nof the High Court as quoted earlier and the conclusion drawn
\ntherefrom that\tit could  not be  conclusively inferred that
\nthe could  object of  the assembly was to commit the murder.
\nIf really  a mob  of 50-60  persons wanted to commit. murder
\nnothing prevented  them from  inflicting severer injuries on
\nthe persons  of Govindbhai and the two victims. more so,when
\nsome of\t them were  armed with\tshare cutting  and dangerous
\nweapons. The  fact that\t the accused-appellants Nos. 1 and 2
\nused blunt  edges of  the weapons  and not their share edges
\ngoes a\tlong way  to show  that they  did not  also share  a
\ncommon intention to will Govindbhai when they assaulted him.
\nWe are,\t therefore unable  to accent  the contention  of Mr.
\nLalit that  the members\t of the unlawful assembly shared the
\ncommon object  or accused-appellants Nos. 1 and 2 shared the
\ncommon intention of committing the murder of Govindbhai.\n<\/p>\n
     Coming now\t to the contention of Mr. Ramaswamy that the
\nfacts that  most of the members of the assembly only carried
\nordinary sticks. a few of which according to the prosecution
\nwere recovered\tfrom the  houses of  the  accused-appellants
\nclearly indicated  that the  common object  of the  unlawful
\nassembly was  only to cause simple hurt we can only say that
\neven  if  we  accept  his  contention,\tstill  the  accused-
\nappellants would  be  liable  for  the\toffence\t of  causing
\ngrievous hurt as Section 149 IPC applies not only to offence
\nactually committed  in pursuance  of the  common object\t but
\nalso the  offence that members of the unlawful assembly knew
\nwas likely  to be  committed; and  it would be impossible in
\nthe facts  of this  case to  hold that\tthe members  of\t the
\nunlawful assembly did not know that grievous hurt was likely
\nto be committed by an unlawful assembly, as large as the one
\nwith which   we\t are concerned\there some of whom were armed
\nwith dangerous\tweapons. Accordingly,  even  if\t the  common
\nobject be  not placed  as high as murder as contended by Mr.
\nLalit, the conviction of the accused-appellant under Section
\n326 IPC simpliciter or 326 read with 149 IPC as the case may
\nbe for\tthe assaults  on Govindbhai  and Vinod has got to be
\nupheld.\n<\/p>\n
     That brings us to the question of sentence as raised by
\nMr. Lalit it is undoubtedly true that considering the manner
\nin which  the accused-appellants  assaulted  Govindbhai\t the
\nsentence of  three years  imposed by the High Court for that
\noffence errs  on the side of leniency. But then we cannot be
\noblivious of the fact that since the offences were committed
\nmore then  14 years have elapsed and during this long period
\nthe appellants\thave gone  through the ordeal of a protected
\ncriminal trial\tand of\tthe two\t appeals. Having  given\t our
\nanxious consideration  to these\t competing claims  we do not
\nfeel inclined to enhance the sentence.\n<\/p>\n
     In the  result both  the  appeals\tare  dismissed.\t The
\naccused –  appellants. who  are on bail. shall now surrender
\nto their  bail bonds  to serve\tout the sentences imposed by
\nthe High Court.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & … vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995 Equivalent citations: 1995 AIR 2505, 1995 SCC (5) 602 Author: M M.K. Bench: Mukherjee M.K. (J) PETITIONER: BHARWAD JAKSHIBHAI NAGJIBHAI & ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF GUJARAT DATE OF JUDGMENT24\/08\/1995 BENCH: MUKHERJEE M.K. (J) BENCH: MUKHERJEE […]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-88420","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nBharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & ... vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995 - 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\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & ... vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995\" \/>\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=\"1995-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-15T15:03:09+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=\"16 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & … vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995\",\"datePublished\":\"1995-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-15T15:03:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995\"},\"wordCount\":3127,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995\",\"name\":\"Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & ... vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1995-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-15T15:03:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & … vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995\"}]},{\"@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":"Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & ... vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995 - 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\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & ... vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1995-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-15T15:03:09+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":"16 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & … vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995","datePublished":"1995-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-15T15:03:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995"},"wordCount":3127,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995","name":"Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & ... vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1995-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-15T15:03:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharwad-jakshibhai-nagjibhai-vs-the-state-of-gujarat-on-24-august-1995#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bharwad Jakshibhai Nagjibhai & … vs The State Of Gujarat on 24 August, 1995"}]},{"@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\/88420","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=88420"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/88420\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=88420"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=88420"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=88420"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}