HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Siddheshwar @ Balasaheb Shankar Naikvade – Respondent
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 21.02.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Navsari (hereinafter be referred to as “the trial Court”) in Sessions Case No. 42 of 2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 306 and 114 etc of the Indian Penal Code whereby the the trial Court has acquitted the accused for the alleged offences.
2. Brief facts of the present case, in nutshell, are as under:-
2.1 It is the case of the prosecution that the daughter of the complainant namely Sadhnaben married with accused No.1 as per their ritual at Brampur, Taluka: Mangalveda, District: Solapur, Maharashtra and accused No.1 was serving as driver in Vasudhara Dairy at Chikhali Aalipur, District: Navsari and out of the wedlock, they have one child namely Shubham aged about eight months. It is the case of the prosecution that after delivery of two months, Sadhnaben was brought by her husband and sister-in-law and Sadhnaben was residing with her husband and child at Chikhali and two months prior on 22.05.2008, two kilometer away from the complainant
Chandrappa and others Vs. State of Karnataka reported in (2007) 4 SCC 415
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; acquittal is upheld when evidence does not convincingly establish guilt.
The appellate court upheld the trial Court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for compelling evidence to overturn such decisions.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and acquittals carry a double presumption of innocence, requiring strong grounds for reversal.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal of respondents due to insufficient evidence of cruelty and abetment of suicide, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for substa....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in cases of acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for reliable evidence linking alleged cruelty to suicide.
The presumption of abetment under Section 113A of the Evidence Act does not apply automatically; the prosecution must prove cruelty to establish guilt under Sections 306 and 498A IPC.
The presumption of innocence in favor of the accused and the requirement for clear and convincing evidence to prove guilt, especially in cases of acquittal.
The prosecution must provide clear evidence of instigation or connection to establish charges of cruelty and abetment of suicide under IPC; mere allegations are insufficient.
The court emphasized that mere allegations of harassment are insufficient to establish abetment of suicide; clear evidence of intent and coercion is required.
The prosecution failed to establish the elements of abetment and cruelty, leading to the upholding of the trial Court's acquittal.
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.