The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of adequate reasons for acquittal, the trustworthiness of evidence, and the application of legal principles in appeals against acquittal.

1. These two Criminal Appeal Nos. 56 of 2014 and 73 of 2014 have been filed by the State of Maharashtra and the complainant - Smt. Vijaya Dilipsingh Shirke against the judgment and order of acquittal of accused Nos. 2, 6, 7, 8, 12, 14 and 16. Learned Public Prosecutor Mrs. B.H. Dangre submitted that the learned trial Judge has recorded reasons which are clearly perverse in recording the acquittal of these accused persons. Referring to the entire evidence that was read over to us by the Counsel for both the parties, she submitted that on the same evidence on which eight accused persons have been convicted, these accused have been acquitted for the reasons which are perverse, flimsy and has, thus, caused miscarriage of justice to the State. She then submitted that in the substantive evidence of PW 26 and PW 33, these accused have been specifically named and even then learned trial Judge has for no good reasons recorded the order of acquittal. The Public Prosecutor relied on the arguments made by her in reply to the appeals filed by the convicted accused.

2. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing for these accused persons, who have been acquitted, vehemently opposed these appeals against acquittal and submitted that this Court should not interfere with the order of acquittal looking to the settled legal principles in relation to the appeal against acquittal. The High Court would not substitute its view merely because second view is possible. All the defence Counsel then submitted that it is not that the acquittal was recorded by the learned trial Judge for any flimsy reasons and on the contrary as specifically pointed out by Mr. A.V. Gupta, learned Adv., for the defence, that the acquittal was recorded by the learned trial Judge for want of other material and corroborative evidence and circumstances, since, according to trial Court, testimony of PW 26 and PW 33 was not supported by other material circumstances or corroborative evidence. All the learned Counsel for the respective respondents - acquitted accused, therefore, prayed for dismissal of these appeals against acquittal.

REASONS:

3. We have considered these appeals against acquittal and the grounds raised therein. We have heard learned Counsel for the rival parties. We have seen the reasons recorded by the learned trial Judge for recording acquittal of accused Nos. 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 12, 14 and 16. It is important to point out at this stage that the accused No. 3 -Sachin Gawande died during trial and, therefore, we are concerned with the acquittal of accused Nos. 2, 6, 7, 8, 12, 14 and 16 who are now seven in number. The trial Judge recorded the following reasons for making an order of their acquittal:--

"117.......................................................................Similarly her evidence against A/7 Pandurang Injewar, A/12 Mahesh Bante, A/14 Sandeep Sanas and A/16 Maroti Walke does not inspire confidence."

"125. In the case in hand, accused Nos. 1, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13 and 15 along with some other un-identified assailants armed with deadly weapons came on the spot and belaboured the deceased Pintu on account of previous enmity. The facts and circumstances of the case unequivocally prove the existence of their common object forming unlawful assembly and attacked the deceased Pintu. The evidence so far as against rest of accused persons in question creating doubts to reveal their complicity in the alleged crime and hence, 1 record my finding accordingly against point No. 5."

4. We find from the careful reading of the entire judgment that except the above reasons, no reasons appear in the judgment for recording the order of acquittal of these accused persons. In fact, it is paradoxical. We have already discussed the evidence of the witnesses including the witnesses PW 26 and PW 33 and also indicated the names of these acquitted accused in bracket for emphasis. We have discussed in detail about the trustworthiness of the evidence of these two eye-witness in so far as