Back
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Harijan Devsi Nathu – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hemant M. Prachchhak, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal dated 25.09.1998 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Jamnagar in Sessions Case No.144 of 1995, whereby the accused – respondents herein came to be acquitted from the charge of the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 149 etc the Indian Penal Code (for short “the IPC”) and under Section 135 of Bombay Police Act, the appellant – State of Gujarat has preferred present criminal appeal u/s 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Code”).
2. Briefly stated, the complainant – Kanjibhai Devabhai Sadiya registered complaint with City “B” Division Police Station, Jamnagar on 03.09.1995 being C.R.No.I-28/1995 inter-alia stating that on 02.09.1995 the complainant went to his field at about 2.30 p.m. and one Devshi Nathu had tied bullocks near the field of the complainant and since the complainant stated not to tie the bullocks near his filed, thereupon, the accused stated that do whatever he can do. On 03.05.1995 at about 6.00 p
The principle of double presumption in favor of the accused and the requirement to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the necessity of clear evidence for conviction and the presumption of innocence in criminal cases.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the principle that two reasonable views should not disturb the trial ....
The judgment underscores the high standard of proof required in criminal cases, the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused, and the limited scope of appellate review in acquittal appeals.
An appellate court must respect acquittals and only intervene if the trial court's judgment is legally erroneous or misinterprets evidence, maintaining the presumption of innocence.
An appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence after an acquittal and may only intervene if the trial court's decision is perverse or unsupported by credible evidence, emphasizing the h....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
