IMPORTANT POINT
An acquittal by the trial Court carries a double presumption of innocence, and the appellate court should not disturb it unless there is a manifest error or perverse conclusion.

JUDGMENT :

1. Present appeal is filed by the appellant – State of Gujarat under Section 378(1)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the impugned judgment and order dated 04.12.2007 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocity) and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.7, Gondal Camp at Dhoraji (hereinafter be referred to as “the trial Court”) in Special (Atrocity) Case No. 85 of 2005 whereby the trial Court has acquitted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 337, 504, 506(2) etc of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter be referred to as “the Atrocity Act”) whereby the trial Court has acquitted the accused for the alleged offence.

2. Brief facts of the present case, in nutshell, are as under:-

2.1 It is the case of the prosecution that on 11.01.2004 at about 1.30 p.m., the complainant and one Ranjitbhai Muljibhai were collecting the sand royalty as they were having a lease for excavating the sand from Fofal River, situated in the sim of Village: Rangpar, at that time, the accused came there and told the complainant that why they were collecting the royalty. It is the case of the prosecution that there was hot altercation had taken place and the accused used filthy language and also insulted by their case with an intend to humiliate to the complainant and in that altercation, accused has pelted stone on the complainant and on account of the same, complainant sustained injury on the forehead and he was in bleeding condition and, thereafter he was taken to Jamkandorna Hospital by P.W.3 Bharatbhai Muljibhai where he had taken the treatment and therefore the complainant had lodged the complaint before the concerned police station being C.R.No.I-3 of 2004.

2.2 On the basis of the said incident, the FIR came to be lodged for the aforesaid offences against the accused. The Investigating Officer has recorded statements of the witnesses, prepared the panchnama of the scene of offence and collected necessary evidence against the accused.

2.3 After completion of investigation, as the sufficient evidence was found, the police has filed the charge-sheet against all the accused before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class. As the offence was triable by the Court of Sessions, the concerned Court has committed the case under Section 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code to the Court of Sessions wherein it has been registered as Special (Atrocity) Case No. 85 of 2005.

2.4 The charge against the accused came to be framed by the trial Court on 28.12.2006 for the aforesaid offences against the accused and explained it to him, the accused denied having committed any offence. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and pleaded for trial and hence, the case was tried by the trial Court.

2.5 To prove the case, the prosecution has examined as many as four witnesses and also produced the documentary evidence.

2.6 After closure of the evidence, further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been recorded. After hearing both sides and considering the evidence on records, the trial Court by impugned judgment and order has acquitted the accused from all the charges levelled against him.

3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order of acquittal the appellant – State of Gujarat has preferred this Appeal.

4. Heard Ms.Jyoti Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant – State of Gujarat at length. It is relevant to note that as per the order dated 08.10.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, the original complainant had joined as party respondent and issued notice to him. It appears from the record that the original complainant was expired and the death certificate of the complainant is on record with affidavit of service by police constable who had served the notice upon the complainant and so far as the original