Point of law : Where the trial court allows itself to be beset with fanciful doubts, rejects creditworthy evidence for slender reasons and takes a view of the evidence which is but barely possible, it is the obvious duty of the High Court to interfere in the interest of justice, lest the administration of justice be brought to ridicule.

JUDGMENT :

1. Present appeal has been filed by the appellant – State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the judgment and order dated 27.8.2007, passed in Special Atrocity Case No. 4 of 2004 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Tract Court No.5, Bhavnagar, Camp at Mahuwa Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 15, Vadodara, recording the acquittal of the Respondents (original accused persons).

2. The facts, in brief, are that the offence being C.R. No. I- 139/2003 came to be registered with Alang Police Station for the offence under Sections 323, 447, 504, 506 (2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act. The said complaint was addressed by the complainant to the District Superintendent of Police, Bhavnagar on 18.12.2003. It is disclosed in the complaint that the complainant and the accused persons are from the same village. The Respondent – Accused No.3 is the brother of the Sarpanch, the Respondent Accused No.1 is the brother of Vice Sarpanch and the Respondent – Accused No.4 is the cousin brother of the Sarpanch. It is further disclosed in the complaint that the son of the complainant got admission in the Ukharala Primary School, wherein the teacher viz. Maheshbhai beat his son. Hence, the complainant addressed an application to Anandiben Patel, Education Minister, Gandhinagar. Hence the Respondents – Accused persons got excited and on 18.12.2003 at about 11:30 hours came and started abusing the complainant and also threatened to withdraw the application addressed to the Education Minister. Thereafter, the Respondents – Accused persons started giving kick and fist blow to the complainant. On raising screams, the surrounding persons gathered there and hence the Respondents – Accused persons ran away from the place of offence.

3. On the basis of the complaint, the investigation started and the investigation was handed over to the Police Officer, SC / ST Cell, Bhavnagar. The Investigating Officer drew the scene of offence panchnama, arrested the accused persons, drew the body position panchnama of the accused persons, collected MLC certificate and the caste certificate of the complainant.

4. On conclusion of the investigation, on the basis of material collected against the Respondents – Accused persons, since the investigating Officer found a prima facie case against the Respondents – Accused persons, charge sheet came to be filed for the offence under Sections 323, 447, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act.

5. Since the case registered against the Respondents – Accused persons was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, same was committed to the Court of Sessions under Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is numbered as Sessions Case No. 4 of 2004.

6. On committal, the case was transferred and placed for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.5, Bhavnagar Camp at Mahuwa, who had initially framed charge against the Respondents / Accused persons vide Exh.4. The charge was read and explained to the Respondents / Accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.

7. In order to bring home the charge leveled against the Respondents – Accused persons, the prosecution has examined as many as 15 witnesses and relied upon their oral testimony and has also produced as many as 13 documentary evidence, and after completion of the investigation, Charge-sheet was filed against the accused persons for the offences in question. The learned trial Judge framed the Charge. Since the accused did not plead guilty, trial was proceeded against the accused persons. Vide impugned judgment and order dated 27.08.2007, the learned trial Judge acquitted the accused persons. Being aggrieved by the same, the State has preferred the present appeal.

8. Heard, learned APP Ms. Jirgha Jhaveri for the Appellant – State and learned Advocat