Gujarat High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Murder Case Due to Untraceable Accused. Appeal under Section 378(1)(3) CrPC fails as respondent-original accused cannot be located despite police report.

High Court: Gujarat High Court
  • 11
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The State of Gujarat filed an appeal under Section 378(1)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, challenging the judgment dated 04.04.2003 passed by the learned Joint District Judge & Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court NO.1), Bharuch in Sessions Case No.17 of 2000, whereby the respondent-original accused No.1, Anishkhan Murtujakhan Pathan, was acquitted of charges. The case of the prosecution was that on 24.10.1999, the complainant (husband of the deceased) received a phone call from a neighbour asking him to rush home. Upon arrival, he found his wife lying face down with stab wounds on her neck and chest. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against four accused, including the respondent. Three accused absconded during trial. The present appeal was preferred by the State. When the appeal came up for hearing, learned APP Mr. J.K. Shah appeared for the appellant State. No one appeared for the respondent. The APP submitted a report dated 20.02.2026 from the Police Inspector, Ankleshwar GIDC police station, stating that the respondent-original accused No.1 is not traceable at his residence. The court took the report on record. The court noted that the appeal was preferred by the State under Section 378(1)(3) CrPC challenging the acquittal. Since the respondent-accused could not be traced and no representation was made on his behalf, the court held that the appeal cannot proceed and dismissed it for non-prosecution.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Appeal Against Acquittal - Section 378(1)(3) CrPC - Abatement - State appeal challenging acquittal of accused in murder case - Respondent-accused untraceable as per police report - No representation despite notice - Held that appeal cannot proceed and is dismissed for non-prosecution (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the State appeal against acquittal can be sustained when the respondent-accused is untraceable and not served.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution as the respondent-accused is untraceable and no representation is made on his behalf.

Law Points

  • Appeal against acquittal
  • Section 378 CrPC
  • abatement of appeal
  • untraceable accused
  • criminal appeal dismissal
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (GUJ) (02) 22

R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 961 of 2003

2026-02-21

Nikhil S. Kariel, Maulik J. Shelat

Mr. J.K. Shah (Addl. Public Prosecutor) for the Appellant

State of Gujarat

Anishkhan Murtujakhan Pathan

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against acquittal

Remedy Sought

State seeking reversal of acquittal of respondent-accused in murder case

Filing Reason

State challenged the judgment of acquittal passed by Sessions Court

Previous Decisions

Sessions Case No.17 of 2000 resulted in acquittal of accused on 04.04.2003

Issues

Whether the appeal can proceed when the respondent-accused is untraceable and not served.

Submissions/Arguments

Learned APP submitted a police report dated 20.02.2026 stating that the respondent-original accused No.1 is not traceable at his residence.

Ratio Decidendi

An appeal against acquittal cannot proceed when the respondent-accused is untraceable and not served, leading to dismissal for non-prosecution.

Judgment Excerpts

Heard learned APP Mr. J.K.Shah for the appellant State. None present for the respondent and whereas report by the Police Inspector Ankleshwar GIDC police station dated 20.02.2026 has been submitted by learned APP that the respondent original accused No.1, is not traceable at his residence. The present appeal has been preferred by the State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 challenging the judgment dated 04.04.2003 passed by the learned Joint District Judge & Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court NO.1), Bharuch in Sessions Case No.17 of 2000 whereby the accused, has been acquitted of the charges.

Procedural History

The trial court acquitted the accused on 04.04.2003. The State filed the present appeal under Section 378(1)(3) CrPC. On 21.02.2026, the appeal was heard; the respondent was untraceable as per police report dated 20.02.2026. The court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.

Acts & Sections

  • Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: 378(1)(3)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows CISF Appeal in Disciplinary Matter — Reinstatement and Back Wages Set Aside. Disciplinary Authority's Findings Based on Consistent Evidence Cannot Be Overturned by High Court in Writ Jurisdiction.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Directs Statewide Integration of Building Plan Management System with MahaRERA to Prevent Fraudulent Real Estate Registrations. Court Emphasizes Need for Coordinated Verification of Commencement and Occupation Certificates Under RER...