THAKOR ARJANJI SARDARJI(Abated) & Ors. v. STATE OF GUJARAT

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 09/03/2026 JUDGMENT [1.0] By way of present revision application under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”), the applicants have requested to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 02.07.2015 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Mahesana, at Visnagar in Criminal Appeal No.19/2013 and to conFrm the judgment and order dated 10.05.2013 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class in Criminal Case No.408/2001. [2.0] Heard the learned advocate for the applicants, learned advocate for respondent No.1 and learned APP for respondent No.1. R/CR.RA/382/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 [3.0] Perusing the record, it appears that during the pendency of present criminal revision application, parties have arrived at settlement and as the appellate Court has been pleased to convict the applicants for the oGence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 325 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) and ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. The coordinate Bench in its order dated 07.11.2025 has observed that parties have arrived at amicable settlement and aHdavit of injured witnesses in this regard is placed on record and even the parties had remained present before the coordinate Bench and had consented for quashing and setting aside the conviction of present applicants recorded by the learned Sessions Judge however, the matter requires consideration qua oGence under Section 326 read with Section 114 of the IPC considering the provision of section 320 of the IPC. [4.0] Perusing the record, it appears that the learned trial Court has been pleased to acquit the accused persons on 10.05.2013 giving the beneFt of doubt. In order to prove the case before the learned trial Court, the complainant was examined at Exh.68, witness Thakor Ambaben Chanduji at Exh.70 and both these witnesses were injured eye-witnesses, panch witness Nos.3 and 4 i.e. Thakor Jodhaji Ramanji and Thakor Prahladji Laxmanji examined respectively at Exhs.72 and 74 have turned hostile and witness Nos.5 and 6 i.e. Thakor Jivanji Karshanji and Thakor Balwanji Pratapji are examined respectively at Exhs.81 and 87, Dr. Mansangbhai Laljibhai Chaudhary is examined at Exh.91 and witness No.8 Parmar Maganbhai Mulabhai is examined at Exh.96. The complaint is produced at Exh.69, panchnama at Exh.73 and injury certiFcates are produced respectively at Exhs.92 and 94. Perusing the said evidence, learned trial Court come to the conclusion that no speciFc evidence is produced on record and there is R/CR.RA/382/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 contradiction in the evidence and therefore, the learned trial Court extended the beneFt of doubt to the accused persons but in the appeal, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused persons for the oGence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 325, 326 read with Section 114 of the IPC based on the evidence of two injured eye- witnesses, as the learned trial Court come to the conclusion that accused persons were under the inLuence of alcohol, they were unable to inLict any indiscriminate blow or any injury to the injured witnesses but learned appellate Court come to the conclusion that axe was used by the accused No.1 – Thakor Arjanji Sardarji (now deceased) and he made an assault and said fact is also not in dispute. The injury falls in the purview of section 320 of the IPC and conviction was recorded but during the pendency of the present revision application, accused No.1 – Thakor Arjanji Sardarji expired and therefore, the case came to be abated qua accused No.1. However, as the oGences under Sections 323, 324, 325 and 326 read with Section 114 of the IPC are already settled between the parties and coordinate Bench has recorded the settlement qua oGence under Sections 323, 324 and 325 of the IPC only, this Court is of considered view that the allegation qua oGence under Section 326 of the IPC were only against accused No.1, who is now no more, considering the compromise between the parties and the fact that the oGence is of the year 2001 and initially on

10.05.2013, accused persons were given beneFt of doubt and thereafter, the appellate Court has been pleased to convict on

02.07.2015 and considering the long drawn battle between the parties and settlement having been arrived at after 26 years and as parties and victims have suGered a lot for such a long time, it would be appropriate and better to restore the relationship between the parties based on compromise and this Court deems it Ft without discussing further on merits, particularly considering the allegation of R/CR.RA/382/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 assault against accused No.1, who is now no more, the injury which falls under the grievous hurt deFned under Section 320 of the IPC, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of H.N. Pandakumar vs. State of Karnataka reported in 2025 INSC 37, present revision application deserves consideration. [5.0] In wake of aforesaid conspectus, present revision application is allowed. Impugned judgment and order dated 02.07.2015 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Mahesana, at Visnagar in Criminal Appeal No.19/2013 is hereby quashed and set aside and the judgment and order dated 10.05.2013 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class in Criminal Case No.408/2001 is hereby conFrmed. Present revision application is disposed of in aforesaid terms. Ajay (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.) Sd/- Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.