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/2590/2009 1/ 5 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 2590 of 2009
=========================================================
HARKISHAN
R. JOSHI, ASST. LAW OFFICER - Appellant(s)
Versus
GOVERNMENT
OF GUJARAT & 7 - Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
KL DAVE for
Appellant(s) : 1,
MR DC SEJPAL, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Opponent(s) : 1,
None for Opponent(s) : 2 -
8.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date
: 15/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
The appellant had filed this Appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 28th December 2006 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Junagadh, in Criminal Case No. 7379 of 1993, whereby the respondents accused have been acquitted from the charges levelled against them.
The brief facts of the prosecution case is that the Respondent No.2-accused is a Firm and Respondent Nos.3 to 7 are the Directors of Respondent No.1 and the Respondent No.8 is a Plant In-charge of the Respondent No.1 Firm. It it also the case of the prosecution that the Respondent No.1 Firm is manufacturing Reactive Dyes using raw materials like H. Acid, Vinyl Sulphone, K. Acid, etc. It is also the case of the prosecution that on 21st May 1993 officials of the appellant had visited the Respondent No.1 and prepared a Report. They had also collected water samples from the Respondent No.1 Firm. It is also the case of the prosecution that on 24th May 1993 they had sent the sample to the Analysis Board for analysis. The appellant had received the Analysis Report on 28th June 1993, which shows that the respondents have committed breach of Section 43, 44 and 47 of the Water Act. It is also the case of the prosecution that every month the respondents manufactured 1 MT Reactive Dyes and generating polluted water. This polluted water is discharged by the respondents without any consent taken from the appellant. Therefore, a complaint was filed by the appellant against the respondents under Sections 24 and 25 of The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 in the Court of learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Junagadh. Pending the trial, original accused no.6 had expired and case against him was abated.
Thereafter, the trial was initiated against the respondents accused in the Court of learned Magistrate. To prove the case against the respondents accused, the prosecution has examined the witnesses and also produced documentary evidence and at the end of the trial, the learned Magistrate has acquitted the respondents accused from the charges levelled against them, vide judgment and order dated 28th December 2006 in Criminal Case No.7379 of 1993.
Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order passed by the learned Magistrate, the appellant has filed the present Appeal.
Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant, has contended that the judgment and order of Trial Court is against the provisions of law. The Trial Court has not properly appreciated the facts and evidence led by the prosecution and looking to the provisions of law itself it is clearly established that the prosecution has proved the whole ingredients of offence against the respondents-accused. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant has also taken this Court through the oral as well as documentary evidence.
I have perused the oral as well as documentary evidence. I have also considered the submissions made by the learned advocate on behalf of the appellant. From the perusal of the judgment of the Trial Court it is established that has not supported the case of prosecution.
Thus, in my opinion, looking to the evidence on record, from the evidence itself it is clearly established that the prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
At the outset it is required to be noted that the principles which would govern and regulate the hearing of appeal by this Court against an order of acquittal passed by the Trial Court have been very succinctly explained by the Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions. Thus, the powers which this Court may exercise against an order of acquittal are well settled. Thus, in case the Appellate Court agrees with the reasons and the findings given by the lower Court, then the discussion of evidence is not necessary.
I have gone through the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court and have also perused the oral as well as documentary evidence produced before me and also considered the submissions made by the learned advocate for the appellant. On going through the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court and the papers placed before me, I am of the opinion that the Trial Court has not committed any error in not believing the case of the prosecution. 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. The learned Judge has rightly come to the conclusion that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the case against the respondent accused.
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 reason to interfere with the same. Hence, the Appeal is hereby dismissed at the admission stage.
In view of above, the Appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order dated 28th December 2006 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Junagadh, in Criminal Case No.7379 of 1993 is hereby confirmed. Bail bond, if any, shall stands cancelled.
(Z.
K. Saiyed, J) Anup Top