The presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is reinforced by the trial court's acquittal, and appellate courts should only interfere with an order of acquittal in exceptional cases with compelling circumstances.

JUDGMENT :

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 11.08.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Bhavanagar in Sessions Case No. 13 of 2007 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 (2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, under Sections 183 and 184 of the Village Panchayat Act and under Section 3 (1) (10) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

3. The brief facts of the case are that on 03.12.2006 at about 4:00 p.m. when complainant was in his agriculture field, present respondents-accused had entered into the agricultural field of complainant with cattle and thereby caused damage to the crop of complainant. However, upon asked to them by the complainant, accused got excited and started to give abuse and insulted the complainant and in furtherance gave fist blows and also caused injuries with stick and insulted caste of complainant and humiliated him in public place. The complaint was lodged, investigation was carried out, Panchnama was drawn and statements of the witnesses were recorded. As sufficient evidence to link the accused with the crime were found, a charge-sheet came to be filed against the respondents accused for the aforesaid offences.

3.1 The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the prosecution led evidence and on the conclusion of the trial, The respondents-original accused were charged and tried by judgment and order of acquittal passed dated 11.08.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Bhavnagar in Sessions Case No.13 of 2007 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 (2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 183 and 184 of the Village Panchayat Act and under Section 3 (1) (10) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, wherein at the end of the trial by judgment and order dated 11.08.2010, the learned Judge was pleased to acquit the present respondent-accused for the offence with which they were charged. Therefore, appellant State of Gujarat has preferred appeal under sec. 378(1)(3) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against order of acquittal.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the appellant -State has taken this Court at different depositions as deposed by the witnesses and submitted that the learned Special Judge has committed error in appreciation of evidence. It is further contended that the learned Special Judge has committed error in arriving at the acquittal of the accused persons and therefore appeal may be allowed and reversion be made to the extent the conviction of the accused person.

5. Having heard the arguments advanced by learned advocate for the appellant 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 e