ASHOKKUMAR C. JOSHI
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Balram Dulilal Meena – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the appellant – State and learned advocate Mr. V.A. Mansuri for respondent No.1 and learned advocate Mr. R.S. Joshi with Mr. Mrugen Purohit for respondent No.3 at length.
2. The State has filed this acquittal appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 19.05.2010 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Panchmahal at Godhra in Sessions Case No. 113 of 2007 for the offences punishable under Sections 308, 337, 427 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Public Property Act.
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 05.01.2007 original accused No.3 Mahmmad Husen Manubhai Sumra, resident of Railway Colony, Dakor. resident of was serving as Switchman at Champaner Railway Station. Original accused No.3 knew that there was Gandhidham Shalimar goods train standing at Down Loop Line of Champaner Railway Station. He was having instructions of passing running through goods train named Konraj T.K.D. Goods train and it was to pass through down main line of Champaner Railway station. The duty ought to have been discharged by the accused No.3 to clean the track and line of Konraj T.K.D. Goods train in order to avoid
Balbir Singh v. State of Punjab
Bhagwan Singh v. State of M.P.
Chaman Lal v. The State of Himachal Pradesh
Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka
Gamini Bala Koteswara Rao v. State of A.P.
K. Gopal Reddy v. State of A.P.
K. Ramakrishnan Unnithan v. State of Kerala
Khedu Mohton v. State of Bihar
Kuldeep Singh v. Commissioner of Police
M.G. Agarwal v. State of Maharashtra
Narendra Singh v. State of M.P.
Perla Somasekhara Reddy v. State of A.P.
Ramesh Babulal Doshi v. State of Gujarat
S. Rama Krishna v. S. Rami Reddy
Shailendra Pratap v. State of U.P.
Shambhoo Missir v. State of Bihar
State of Goa v. Sanjay Thakran
State of U.P. v. Banne (2009) 4 SCC 271
State of U.P. v. Ram Veer Singh (2007) 13 SCC 102
The judgment emphasized the presumption of innocence, the need for compelling circumstances to interfere with an order of acquittal, and the principles for appellate court's interference with the ord....
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 comp....
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 or....
The presumption of innocence and the principles for appellate courts to review evidence in appeals against acquittal were central to the judgment.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.