Back
A. Y. KOGJE, SAMIR J. DAVE
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
VISHNUBHAI MANIBHAI BHOI – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.Y. KOGJE, J.
1. This appeal is filed by the State under Section 378(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code against judgment and order of acquittal dated 14.02.2024 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in Sessions Case No. 65 of 2022.
2. It is a case where on account of minor dispute of the accused with the father (since deceased), the son, loosing temper, assaulted the father with “dhoka” (wooden bat) resulting in serious injuries.
3. Learned APP submitted that the case is of an eyewitness, where the prosecution had examined PW-1 Kokilaben, Exh.12, who is mother of the accused and wife of the deceased and according to this witness, the incident had taken place in their house and therefore, she was a natural eyewitness. However, an error is committed by the Sessions Court in not treating her as an eyewitness.
3.1 It is argued that for not treating PW-1 as eyewitness, the Sessions Court has not given any convincing reasons, but has based its finding on the panchnama of scene of offence to conclude that the place where PW-1 was washing cloths, was outside the house whereas the incident has taken place inside the house and therefore, she was not treat
The appellate court upheld the presumption of innocence, emphasizing the need for credible evidence linking the accused to the crime, ultimately dismissing the appeal against acquittal.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt and credibility of eyewitnesses is essential for conviction.
An acquittal carries a double presumption of innocence, and the appellate court must not disturb findings unless clear error is established.
Conviction under Sections 302 and 326 of IPC requires credible ocular evidence, with emphasis on eyewitness credibility, especially from injured parties, establishing guilt despite differing roles am....
Conviction for murder under Section 302 established through credible eyewitness testimony and medical evidence, despite minor inconsistencies and investigation delays.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, while minor contradictions in witness testimony should not undermine the core evidence substantiating the charges.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused, and the importance of circumstantial ....
Murder – Exaggerated devotion to rule of benefit of doubt must not nurture fanciful doubts letting guilty escape is not doing justice, according to law.
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
