STATE OF GUJARATversusDHIRUBHAI RAMABHAI NAYKA

      R/CR.A/482/2002                                 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/01/2026




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                        R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 482 of 2002


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
==========================================================

             Approved for Reporting                  Yes          No

==========================================================
                               STATE OF GUJARAT
                                     Versus
                           DHIRUBHAI RAMABHAI NAYKA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RONAK RAVAL APP for the Appellant
MR MA BUKHARI(211) for the Respondent
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
           and
           HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI

                                 Date : 28/01/2026

                            ORAL JUDGMENT
               (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)

1.     Here is the Appeal by the State against the judgment and order of
       acquittal.

2.     Being dissatisfied by the judgment and order passed by the learned
       Sessions Judge, Navsari, passed in Sessions Case No.130 of 2001,
       dated 19.02.2002, acquitting the respondent from the offence
       punishable under Section 307, 504 of the Indian Penal Code, the
       State has preferred instant appeal under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C.



                                     Page 1 of 6
      R/CR.A/482/2002                                  JUDGMENT DATED: 28/01/2026




3.     This Court has heard Mr. Ronak Raval, learned Additional Public
       Prosecutor and learned advocates Mr.M. A. Bukhari, for the
       respective parties.

4.     Brief facts giving rise to file the present Appeal are that, four
       accused – the respondent accused Dhirubhai Naika and the deceased
       Dhaniben had been live in relationship and stayed at the village :
       Nani Desad, Gandevi, Dist.: Navsari. On 26.06.2001, there was a
       dispute arose on the aspect of cooking meal and due to sudden fight
       in the hit of passion, the accused respondent threw a live match stick
       upon the injured Dhaniben, as a result, she sustained burn injuries of
       the first category. She was referred to local CHC and then Navsari
       Government Hospital. The statement of the injured being recorded
       by the Executive Magistrate and on the basis of complaint, the
       accused was chargesheeted for the act of attempt to murder and
       provocation.

5..    Since the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, the
       Court committed the case to the Sessions Court, which has been
       culminated into Sessions Case No. 130 of 2001.

6.     The learned Sessions Judge framed charge under Sections 307, 504
       of the Indian Penal Code against the accused to which, he pleaded
       not guilty and claimed trial.

7.     In the course of trial, the injured Dhaniben died and as such, the
       charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was not added
       because, it is not the case of the prosecution that, she succumbed to
       the injuries on account of the said incident.



                                       Page 2 of 6
     R/CR.A/482/2002                               JUDGMENT DATED: 28/01/2026




8.    In order to prove the charge, the prosecution has examined as many
      as 11 witnesses and exhibited 14 documents.

9.    On conclusion of oral evidence, the trial Court recorded further
      statements of the accused as provided under Section 313 of the
      Code, wherein, they claimed their innocence.

10. The learned Sessions Judge after appreciating and examining the
      oral as well as documentary evidence acquitted the accused herein
      for the offences with which he was charged, on the ground that, the
      presence of the respondent accused at the place is not established
      and in absence of cogent evidence, involving him in the alleged
      crime, the charge has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

11. Mr. Ronak Raval, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing
      for the appellant – State assailing the judgment and order of
      acquittal, has submitted that the findings of acquittal are contrary to
      law and evidence on record and the findings recorded are palpably
      erroneous and based on the irrelevant material. The witnesses have
      categorically stated that the respondent accused was the author of
      crime and their version being corroborated by the medical evidence.

12. In such circumstances, as referred above, it has been submitted that
      while acquitting the respondent accused, the trial Court has
      discarded and ignored the truthful, reliable and acceptable evidence
      and as such, no cogent reasons being assigned while discarding such
      evidence. Therefore, it is submitted that the conclusion of acquittal
      recorded by the Trial Court is contrary to the evidence on record and
      upon erroneous understanding of law. Thus, it is prayed that the
      prosecution has succeeded in proving the charge against the

                                  Page 3 of 6
   R/CR.A/482/2002                              JUDGMENT DATED: 28/01/2026




    respondents accused and the judgment and order of acquittal be set
    aside and accused may be convicted and sentenced for the offence as
    referred above.

13. Mr. Bukhari, learned advocate appearing for the respondent accused
    has submitted that the High Court in a case of Appeal against the
    acquittal, can interfere only when there are compelling substantial
    reasons for doing so and more particularly, the findings are without
    reasons and unreasonable and contrary to the evidence. In the facts
    of the present case, due to death of the injured, the true facts being
    not brought on record by the prosecution and therefore the presence
    of the accused is not proved and established and in that view of the
    matter, due to the dispute between the parties, the false involvement
    cannot be ruled out and therefore, the view taken by the trial Court
    would be reasonable and plausible view.

14. In such circumstances, referred to above, learned counsel appearing
    for the respondents accused, has submitted that the Trial Court while
    discarding the evidence of oral testimonies of the witnesses have
    assigned cogent and sufficient reasons while acquitting the accused
    and therefore, the judgment of acquittal passed is well reasoned,
    legally sustainable and does not suffer any infirmity warranting
    interference by this Court.

15. Before proceeding to address the rival submissions, we would like to
    place on record the scope of interference in an appeal against the
    acquittal and when the same is justified. In exceptional cases, where
    there are compelling circumstances and the judgment under appeal is
    found to be perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the


                                  Page 4 of 6
   R/CR.A/482/2002                                 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/01/2026




     judgment of acquittal. The Appellate Court should bare in mind the
     presence of innocence of the accused and further that, the trial
     Court’s acquittal bolsters the presumption of his innocence.
     Interference in a routine manner, where the other view of possible
     should be avoided, unless there are reasons for interference.

16. In the present case the issue falls for our consideration as to whether
     the trial Court was justified in acquitting the accused?

17. We have carefully examined the oral as well as documentary
     evidence and perused the findings of acquittal rendered by the Trial
     Court.

18. In the facts of the present case, there is no dispute about the burn
     injuries sustained by injured Dhaniben. The issue is whether the
     accused with intention to kill the injured, caused burn injuries to her
     or not?

19. We are in complete agreement with the analysis of the evidence
     undertaken by the trial Court and the reasons for acquitting are
     seems to be based on the evidence on record. The injured Dhaniben
     was in relationship with the respondent accused. Except bald
     allegation, nothing brought on record by the prosecution that on the
     day of incident, the accused was in the house with the injured
     Dhaniben. In such circumstances, the findings recorded by the trial
     Court with respect to the presence of the respondent accused at the
     spot, does not require any interference. It is relevant to note that, due
     to death of the injured, the prosecution could not be able to prove the
     presence of the accused. In such circumstances, we do not deem it fit
     to entire oral evidence so as to examine the conclusion of acquittal

                                  Page 5 of 6
     R/CR.A/482/2002                                                             JUDGMENT DATED: 28/01/2026




       arrived at by the trial Court.

20. With the observations as aforesaid, the appeal is accordingly
       dismissed. The Registry is directed to send back the R & P to the
       Trial Court. Bail bonds are cancelled, if any, and surety is
       discharged.


                                                                                           (ILESH J. VORA,J)



                                                                                        (R. T. VACHHANI, J)
P.S. JOSHI


 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judges.
 Digitally signed by: PALLAV SUBHASHCHANDRA JOSHI(HC00177), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 29/01/2026 11:27:46




                                                      Page 6 of 6