JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the appellant - State and learned advocate Mr. Dannyson Macwan with learned advocate Manasvi Thapar for the respondent No. 1 at length.

2. The State has filed this acquittal appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 2.8.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court, Court No. 8, Ahmedabad in the Atrocity Criminal Case No. 6 of 2007 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 294(b) and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act, 1989.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant - Ramesh Dalabhai Chauhan belongs to Hindu Vankar community. That, the complainant is possessing a plastic industry for manufacturing plastic material and also doing job work in his plastic industry. That, the alleged accused Bhaveshbhai Patel is also possessing industries in Odhav area in the name and style of "M/s. Ami Plastic" and supplying raw material to the complainant. That, on 9.9.2003, at about 11:30 hours, the complainant had gone to the factory of accused and demanded money, at that time, Bhaveshbhai had told to the complainant to bring "Dies" as well as plastic material and the material which has been supplied by the complainant is too less and therefore, he was informed to supply balance material as well as 'Dies' and thereafter he will give money. That, therefore, the compliant had brought remaining plastic material to the extent of 183 Kg, pipes to the extent of 945 Kg, Shunts/stoppers to the extent of 1000 Nos. through PW 3 - Rameshbhai Ukabhai, who is rickshaw driver and given it to the accused and demanded money. That, upon demanding money, the accused - Bhaveshbhai got angry and gave filthy abuses to the complainant relating to his caste i.e. "Sala Dhedha" with clear intention to insult the complainant in public at large as well as given kick and fist blow to the complainant. That, learned trial Court has acquitted the accused and therefore, the State has preferred this appeal.

4. Learned APP Ms. Jirga Zaveri for the appellant - State has drawn the attention of this Court to the depositions of the witnesses as well as the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court, Court No. 8, Ahmedabad and submitted that the learned Sessions Judge has committed error in appreciating the evidence and therefore, this appeal may be allowed and reverse the order of acquittal into conviction.

5. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Dannyson Macwan for the respondent No. 1 has vehemently and fervently argued that the prosecution has to prove it's case beyond reasonable doubt. He also submitted that learned Sessions Judge has rightly observed and acquitted the accused and therefore there is no need of interference by this Court and the appeal may be dismissed.

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,