The appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal unless the lower court's approach is vitiated by manifest illegality and the decision is characterized as perverse. The judgment and order of acquittal bolsters the presumption of innocence of the accused, and the appellate court must give due weight to the trial court's decision.

JUDGMENT :

ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI, J.

1. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the appellant-State.

2. The State has filed this acquittal appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 16.03.2012 passed by the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Camp at Botad in Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2003, whereby the appeal of the respondent-accused came to be allowed and the judgment and order dated 24.10.2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Botad passed in Criminal Case No. 175 of 1997 convicted and sentenced the accused for the offences punishable under Section 142 of the Bombay Police Act, is quashed and set aside.

3. The brief facts of the case are that by the order of the Deputy Collector, Palitana dated 30.09.1996 the accused-respondent was ordered to remain outside State of Gujarat, even though on 21.01.1997 at about 00:45 hours, the accused was seen and found at Turkha Village and therefore he came to be arrested. The arrest Panchnama in the presence of Panch Witness was drawn and offence punishable under Section 142 of the Bombay Police Act came to be registered. The case was investigated and charge sheet was filed in the Court of learned Magistrate, who at the end of the trial, passed an order of conviction and sentenced him to undergo one year simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- dated 24.10.2003 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Botad passed in Criminal Case No. 175 of 1997.

3.1 Thereafter, the appellant herein has preferred an appeal before the Sessions Court, Bhavnagar being Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2003, whereby the appeal of the appellant came to be dismissed and the judgment order dated 24.10.2003 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Botad passed in Criminal Case No. 175 of 1997 was quashed and set aside and the accused-respondent herein was acquitted from the charges leveled against him. Therefore, appellant State of Gujarat has preferred appeal under sec. 378(1)(3) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against order of acquittal.

4. Learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the State has taken this Court at different depositions as deposed by the witnesses and submitted that the learned Sessions Judge has committed error in appreciation of evidence. Lastly, it is contended that the learned Sessions Judge has committed error in arriving at the acquittal of the accused person and therefore appeal may be allowed and reversion be made to the extent the conviction of the accused person.

5. Having heard the argument advanced by learned Additional Public Prosecutor and considering the materials available on record, this Court would like to refer as under:

5.1 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.

5.2 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