Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.A/2342/2009 2/ 5 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 2342 of 2009
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
=========================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================
MAHESHBHAI
K GOSWAMI, ASST. LAW OFFICER
Versus
GOVERNMENT
OF GUJARAT & 2
=========================================
Appearance
:
MR KL DAVE for Appellant
MR
DC SAJPAL ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent No.1
None for
Respondent No.2
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date
: 03/02/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
[1] The present appeal, under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 26.09.2008 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar in Criminal Case No.3332 of 2004, whereby the accused has been acquitted of the charges under Sections 21, 31(a) r/w. Section 37 of the Prevention of Air (Pollution and Control) Act, 1981, leveled against him.
[2] The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the respondent No.2 is running business of manufacturing bricks, at Village Falla, District : Jamnagar. It is alleged that the pollutants are required to be brought to the specific parameters by giving certain treatment and then after only, can be discharged to the atmosphere. It is allegation that the respondent No.2 found discharging pollution in air, which was untreated and was hazardous to mankind and to environment and agriculturists. On inspection at the site and on completion of investigation, the complaint came to be filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate.
[3] Thereafter, the trial was conducted before the learned Magistrate. The prosecution examined the witnesses and also relied upon the oral as well as documentary evidence. After considering the oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned Magistrate acquitted the respondent No.2 from the charges alleged against him, vide judgment and order dated 26.09.2008.
[4] Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 26.09.2008 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar in Criminal Case No.3332 of 2004, the appellant has preferred the above mentioned Criminal Appeal.
[3] I have heard learned advocate Mr.K L. Dave for the appellant and learned APP Mr.D. C. Sajpal for the respondent No.1. I have also gone through the papers and the judgment and order passed by the trial Court.
[4] Learned advocate Mr.K. L. Dave for the appellant has taken me through the evidence of witnesses and documentary evidence and submitted that from the above, it is established that the accused has not successfully proved his case beyond reasonable doubt. It was contended by learned advocate for the appellant that the judgment and order of the learned Magistrate is not proper, legal and it is erroneous. He has vehemently argued that the learned trial Magistrate has not considered the evidence of the witnesses and the oral as well as documentary evidence produced on record. He has vehemently argued that learned Magistrate erred in discussing the provisions of Sections 31 and 37 of the said Act. It is also contended by the learned advocate for the appellant that the learned Magistrate erred in considering the fact that the Unit has neither obtained the NOC from the Board nor obtained CCA, though it is mandatory provision and without following due procedure, they have started unlawful activities of manufacturing brick, which is breach of provisions of the said Act and, therefore, the judgment and order of the trial Court is deserved to be quashed and set aside.
[5] I have gone through the Judgment and order of the trial Court. I have also perused the reasons assigned by the learned Magistrate. From the record, it clearly appears that the learned Magistrate has considered the evidence of the complainant as well as oral as well as documentary evidence. I have also perused the Notification of the Central Government and other relevant papers produced on record. It also appears that the appellant has no personal knowledge as to whether the notice under Section 37-A issued against the accused, is served or not and he has not produced any acknowledgment receipt regarding the ownership of the place of the accused. After going through the judgment of the trial Court and also the record, it clearly appears that the trial court has not committed any error in acquitting the accused.
[6] In the above view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the trial court was completely justified in acquitting the respondent of the charges leveled against him.
[7] I find that the findings recorded by the trial court are absolutely just and proper and in recording the said findings, no illegality or infirmity has been committed by it.
[8] I am, therefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the court below and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same. Hence the appeal is hereby dismissed. R & P to be sent back to the trial Court, forthwith. Bail bond, if any, stands cancelled.
[ Z.K. SAIYED, J. ] (vijay) Top