Important Point:
a) If two views are possible, the High Court should hold in favour of the accused and should not interfere with an order of acquittal.b) Appellate court may review the evidence in appeals against acquittal under Sections 378 and 386 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Its power of reviewing evidence is wide and the appellate court can reappreciate the entire evidence on record.c) The accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
d) Due or proper weight and consideration must be given to the trial court's decision
e) The appellate court may only overrule or otherwise disturb the trial court's acquittal if it has "very substantial and compelling reasons" for doing so

A.J. Shastri, J.

1. The State has filed the present appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment and order dated 2nd June 2004 passed by the learned Joint District Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Modasa at Sabalpur, in Sessions Case No. 70 of 2004 whereby the learned Sessions Judge pleased to pass an order of acquittal in favor of the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 364, 324, 506(2) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that on 4th January 2004 at about 4:00 hours in the night in the sim of village Vadagam, the accused persons had gathered with a common intention to commit murder of Raju @ Jesa Dhana Khant. In furtherance of this object, respondent No. 1 had given a blow with iron rod and respondent No. 2 had given knife blows, whereby Raju @ Jesa Dhana Khant succumbed to the injuries and died. So much so that even respondent No. 3 had caught hold of Suryaben Jesabhai and another witness Lilaben Jesaji Ramaji to prevent them from intervening by administering threat of death. With respect to this episode, the complainant had tried to save Raju @ Jesa Dhana Khant by intervening, but she also sustained knife blow on her left hand by respondent No. 2 accused and resultantly the complaint came to be filed on account of this incident in question.

3. By ascertaining the aforesaid factual details, the complaint came to be filed before the Dhansura Police Station being Cr.R. No. I-2 of 2004 and pursuant to the said lodging of the complaint the investigating officer had undertaken steps of investigation by executing the inquest panchnama by recording statement of witnesses, recovered the clothes from the body of the deceased and sent the same for analysis, as also drawn the panchnama of scene of offence. The investigating officer has also executed panchnama of the body of the accused persons and recovered muddamal by drawing panchnama and after recovering the muddamal, some of the articles were sent to FSL for further examination and after taking thorough investigation a charge-sheet came to be filed by investigating officer before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Modasa at Sabalpur. Since the case in question was triable by the Court of Sessions, in exercise of power under Section 209 of Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate was pleased to commit the case to the Court of Sessions, which has come-up for consideration before the learned Joint District Judge and Addl. Sessions Judge, F.T.C., Modasa at Sabalpur, which was then registered as Sessions Case No. 70 of 2004.

4. Pursuant to the case having registered as Sessions Case No. 70 of 2004, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge was pleased to frame the charge vide Exh. 2 on 17th May 2004 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 364, 324, 506(2) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. After framing the charge, the plea was recorded of the respondents accused vide Exh. 3, 4 and 5 respectively and since the offence was not admitted by the respondents accused, the case was put-up for further adjudication.

5. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge has given an opportunity to the prosecution to lead the evidence and accordingly the prosecution has led oral as well as documentary evidence in the following form.

Sr. No.	Exhibit	Name	Remarks
1	Exh.7	Suryaben Jesingbhai	Complainant
2	Exh.9	Lilaben Jesaji Ramaji
3	Exh.10	Bhikhabhai Chunilal Darji	Panch
4	Exh.12	Arjunsinh Lalsinh	Panch
5	Exh.14	Babubhai Gopalbhai Patel	Panch
6	Exh.18	Dr. Alkaben Bhimjibhai Vaghela	Doctor
7	Exh.23	Dr. Narendrakumar Sevantilal Kothari	Doctor
8	Exh.25	Laxmanbhai Bhemabhai Damor	Panch
9	Exh.27	Yusufbhai Rasul