JUDGMENT :

Ashokkumar C. Joshi, J.

1. Heard learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the appellant-State at length.

2. The State has filed this acquittal appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 11.1.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Fast Track Judge, Gandhinagar in the Sessions Case No. 81 of 2006 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The brief facts of the case are that when the complainant was present at his home on 11.07.1999, at about 4:00 O'clock, at that time one truck came for delivering metal stones, as the construction work was going on at the nearby plot of the complainant. That, the truck delivered the metal stones in the open plot, without any conversation with the complainant, at that time, the present respondents-accused suddenly came, got excited and asked the complainant as to why the metal stones were delivered there, in response, the complainant told that he did not know anything. That, thereafter, the accused No. 1 started giving abuses and on hearing this, the accused Nos. 2 and 3 also came there and started giving abuses to the complainant. That, as the daughter of the complainant also came there, the accused also given abuses to her and the accused No. 3 gave her kick and fist blows. That, when son of the complainant Yogendra came there, accused No. 2 gave him kick and fist blows. That, it is also alleged that the accused persons gave them threat to kill them and asked them to leave the place. That, the offence was registered, Panchnama of the place of incident was drawn and statement of the witnesses were recorded. That, after completion of the investigation, charge sheet came to be filed. Since, the accused has not pleaded guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried and the prosecution therefore, led the evidence. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Fast Track Judge, Gandhinagar acquitted the accused and therefore, the State has preferred this appeal.

4. Learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah for the State has submitted that the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Fast Track Judge, Gandhinagar has acquitted the accused and thereby committed an error and therefore, this appeal may be allowed.

5. Though rule is served, none is present for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and the respondent No. 3 is un-served expired. Sine the matter is of the year 2008, therefore, Court has proceeded with the matter.

6. Having heard the arguments advanced by learned advocates for the respective parties and considering the materials available on record, this Court would like to refer as under:

6.1 Before adverting to the facts of the case, it would be worthwhile to refer to the scope of interference in acquittal appeals. It is well settled by catena of decisions that an appellate Court has full power to review, re-appreciate and consider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. However, the Appellate Court must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is prejudice in favour of the accused, firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial Court.

6.2 Further, if two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate Court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court. Further, while exercising the powers in appeal against the order of acquittal, the Court of appeal would not ordinarily interfere with the order of acquittal unless the approach of the lower Court is vitiated by some manifest illegality and the conclusion arrive at would not be arrived at by any reasonable person, and therefore, the decision is to be characterized as perverse.

6.3 Me