SANDIPBHAI MAHESHBHAI RANAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.A/1906/2008                                     JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2026




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                        R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1906 of 2008

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI                   Sd/-
==========================================================

             Approved for Reporting                  Yes              No
                                                                      √
==========================================================
                        SANDIPBHAI MAHESHBHAI RANA & ORS.
                                      Versus
                                STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ASHOK N PARMAR(2431) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
MS JYOTI BHATT APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

                                 Date : 29/01/2026

                                 ORAL JUDGMENT


1.      The challenge has been given by the appellants, who
came to be convicted under Section 323, 504 read with
Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘I.P.C’) and
Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
Act (for short ‘the Atrocity Act’) vide judgment and order of
conviction dated 17.06.2008 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bharuch in Special Atrocity
Case No.31 of 2006.


2.      The photocopy of the death certificate of the complainant
– Ashokbhai Somabhai Vasawa has been placed on record. The


                                     Page 1 of 5
     R/CR.A/1906/2008                                   JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2026




injured – Bharatbhai Rameshbhai Vasawa has affirmed the
death of the complainant. The original victim Bharatbhai
Rameshbhai Vasawa has produced an affidavit, affirmed before
the Notary, Vijaykumar N. Rawal.


3.      Learned Advocate Mr. Ashok N. Parmar for the appellants
submitted that the parties have settled the disputes with the
intervention            of   the   village    people   and    the     community
members. Advocate Mr. Parmar submitted that the offences
under I.P.C are compoundable. Thus, made a prayer to accept
the affidavit of the complainant. This Court had verified the
affidavit       through        Bharatbhai        Rameshbhai     Vasawa,         who
appeared before this Court virtually. Though the affidavit was
executed before the notary and a copy of aadhar card is placed
along with the affidavit, this Court insisted for identification
through an independent lawyer. Thus, the victim Bharatbhai
Rameshbhai Vasawa stated that he would be appointing
Advocate Mr. Harivardhan Mishra and sought permission to file
the vakalatnama. Thus, the vakalatnama of Advocate Mr.
Harivardhan Mishra be taken on record for identification of
Bharatbhai Rameshbhai Vasawa.


4.      Learned APP Ms. Jyoti Bhatt submitted that though the
sections under I.P.C are compoundable and the Sections does
not require even the permission of the Court, but the accused
are also convicted under the Atrocity Act, thus stated that
considering the object of the Act and the facts of the matter
that the victim was injured by the accused, learned APP Ms.



                                        Page 2 of 5
     R/CR.A/1906/2008                           JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2026




Bhatt submitted that no settlement should be accepted under
the Atrocity Act.


4.1     Learned APP Ms. Jyoti Bhatt submitted that the amount
which victims have received as compensation be directed to be
recovered from them.


5.      Section 323 and 504 of I.P.C under Section 320 of the
Criminal Procedure Code (for short, ‘Cr.PC’) as per Table-1 are
compoundable by the person who are hurt and who sustained
insult, the victim injured does not even require the permission
of the Court to compound the offence. Thus, in view of the
provision made in First Table under Section 320 Cr.PC, the
offence under Section 323 and 504 stands compounded.


6.      Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act reads as under:


                “3(1)(x) Intentionally insults or intimidates
                with intent to humiliate a member of a
                Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any
                place within public view.”

7.    In the case of Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India
and Others reported in (2020) 4 SCC 727, the Hon’ble
Supreme Court (Per: Hon’ble Justice S.Ravindra Bhatt)
referred to the judgment rendered in the          case  of
Raghunathrao Ganpatrao vs. Union of India, reported in
1993 (1) SCR 480, wherein it has been held as under:-


                 “In our considered opinion this argument is
                 misconceived and has no relevance to the
                 facts of the present case. One of the
                 objectives   of  the Preamble of our
                 Constitution is ‘fraternity assuring the


                                  Page 3 of 5
     R/CR.A/1906/2008                                   JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2026




                 dignity of the individual and the unity
                 and integrity of the nation.’ It will be
                 relevant to cite the explanation given by
                 Dr. Ambedkar for the word ‘fraternity’
                 explaining that ‘fraternity means a sense
                 of common brotherhood of all Indians.’ In
                 a country like ours with so many
                 disruptive      forces    of    regionalism,
                 communalism and linguism, it is necessary
                 to emphasis and re-emphasis that the
                 unity and integrity of India can be
                 preserved only by a spirit of brotherhood.
                 India has one common citizenship and
                 every citizen should feel that he is Indian
                 first irrespective of other basis. In this
                 view, any measure at bringing about
                 equality should be welcome.”

8. In a similar way, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

of Nandini Sundar Vs. State of Chhatisgarh, reported in

(2011) 7 SCC 457, held that:-

                 “The Constitution itself, in no uncertain
                 terms, demands that the State shall strive,
                 incessantly and consistently, to promote
                 fraternity amongst all citizens such that
                 dignity of every citizen is protected,
                 nourished and promoted.”


9.      In     the      case   of   Prathvi     Raj   Chauhan (supra), while

dealing with the constitutional validity of Section 18A of

the Atrocities Act, it was held as under:-

                 “12. The Court can, in exceptional cases,
                 exercise  power   under    Section   482
                 Cr.P.C.  for quashing the cases to


                                       Page 4 of 5
        R/CR.A/1906/2008                                                   JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2026




                     prevent misuse of provisions on settled
                     parameter, as already observed while
                     deciding the review petitions. The legal
                     position is clear and no argument to the
                     contrary has been raised….”


   10.      The parties have been residing in the same village and
   since Sections under 323 and 504 have been compounded,
   and further the facts of the matter suggest that the expression
   which has been considered as an insult referring to their
   community at large, however, it appears that there was no
   specific intention of humiliating the complainant and the victim
   by way of making any casteist remark.

   11.      In view of the above discussions and observations made
   in the referred judgments, the                                  appeal is allowed.                    The
   conviction and sentence of the accused passed by the learned
   Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bharuch vide
   judgment and order of conviction dated 17.06.2008 in Special
   Atrocity Case No.31 of 2006 is quashed and set aside.
   Appellants-accused are acquitted. Registry is directed to send
   the Record and Proceedings back to the concerned trial Court
   forthwith.

                                                                                                          Sd/-

                                                                                          (GITA GOPI,J)
   PARMAR KRISH/16


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: PARMAR KRISH(HC02348), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 29/01/2026 16:20:12




                                                   Page 5 of 5