PANKAJBHAI N VAIDYA Vs. DEMOSHA CHEMICAL LTD
LAWS(GJH)-2008-10-252
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on October 22,2008

Pankajbhai N Vaidya Appellant
VERSUS
Demosha Chemical Ltd Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the appellant -Assistant Law Officer under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the Judgment and order 13th January, 1998, rendered in Criminal Case No. 2238 of 1991, by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Valsad, whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted all the accused from the offences charged against them. It is the case of the appellant -original complainant that as Assistant Law officer in Gujarat Pollution Control Board he was authorized to prosecute the persons who commit the breach of the provision of Section 4 of the Water (Prevention of Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (for short "the Water Act"). The respondent No.1 is a limited company and the respondents No.2 to 6 are the Directors of the said respondent No.1 -Company. The respondent No.1 company was running the industry of Sodium Hydro, Zinc Hydrokside, Liquid Sulfur, etc. and for that purpose the company is using castic Soda, Sulfur, Soda Ash, etc. as raw -material and for that purpose they were using the water and discharging about 45,000 ltrs. water and the respondents were discharging the said polluted water out side in open place without purification. The respondents have obtained permission from the Gujarat Water Pollution Control Board (for short "GPCB"). However, the GPCB has vide order dated 25.5.1989 has rejected the application dated 5.4.1989 made by the respondent No.1 for getting the consult. The Officer of the Board has visited the company premises of respondent No.1 on 14.12.1990 and issued the notice getting sample. The sample was taken in presence of Supervisor of the company and the same was sent to the Analyst. After examining the Analyst found that the respondents are discharging the effluent/polluted water and thereby they have committed the offence punishable under the Water Act. Thereupon the complainant filed Complaint under Sections 24, 25 read with Sections 43, 44 and 47 of the Water Act. The learned JMFC framed the charge Ex.82 against the accused. Thereafter the evidence was led and after hearing the parties the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted all the accused from the charges levelled against them.
(2.) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said Judgment and order dated 13.1.1998 rendered by the learned JMFC, Kadi, in Criminal Case No. 2238 of 1991, the appellant has preferred this Appeal, in the capacity of the complainant.
(3.) HEARD learned APP Ms. Mita Panchal for the State and learned Senior Advocate Mr. M.B. Gandhi on behalf of the respondents -original accused. It is contended by learned APP that the Judgment and order of the trial Court is against the provision of law; the trial Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the prosecution and looking to the provisions of law itself it is established that the prosecution has proved the whole ingredients of the evidence against the present respondents. Learned APP has also read the oral as well as the documentary evidence. On behalf of the respondents -accused learned Senior Advocate Mr. Gandhi has contended that the matter is very old. He has also contended that from the evidence itself it appears that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and has failed to prove the allegation made against the present respondents. He has also contended that the prosecution has not produced any iota of evidence to connect present respondents in the said offence. He has also read the Report of the Expert and contended that the trial Court has considered all the relevant aspects of the matter as well as documentary and oral evidence and after considering all the aspects of the matter the trial Court has acquitted all the accused. Lastly, he contended that the learned Magistrate has assigned cogent reason and after fully appreciating the evidence the learned Magistrate has rightly acquitted the accused from the offences charged against them.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.