IMPORTANT POINT
Acquittal of accused upheld as prosecution failed to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for compelling evidence to overturn acquittals.

JUDGMENT :

(MAULIK J. SHELAT, J.)

1. The present Acquittal Appeal has been filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order dated 30.10.1999 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar (hereinafter referred to as “the Trial Court”) in Session Case No.65 of 1997. The State is in appeal before us. By way of the impugned judgment and order, the accused have been acquitted of all the charges levelled against them under Sections 395, 397, 342 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 25(1) of Arms Act.

2. The short facts of the prosecution case read as under:-

2.1 The prosecution alleges that on 20.12.1996, at around 8:30 PM, when the complainant and others were eating, the accused no.1 to 4 and accused no.9 had entered their office with guns and knife and the accused no.3 guarded with a revolver at the main door and accused nos.1,2,4 and 5 were inside the office with revolver and knife, threatened the complainant and others, who were present there and took the keys of the safe-locker and looted diamonds worth Rs.56,00,000/- and cash to the tune of Rs.25,000/-.

2.2 At the time of incident, complainant - Aswinbhai Kanji along with Ashwin chagganbhai and Jatin Mohanbhai were present and Ramnik Bhagwanbhai had come afterwards. Their hands were tied and white cloth was put around their mouth and they were gagged and locked in the bathroom at the office of the complainant.

2.3 Thereafter, the First Information Report (FIR) was lodged for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 397, 342 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 25(1) of Arms Act.

2.4 The Investigating Officer recorded witness statements, prepared panchnamas including panchnama of scene of offence, panchnama of recovery and discovery of articles looted etc. and the investigation team had also gone to Madhya Pradesh as some accused belong to Madhya Pradesh.

2.5 Upon completion of the investigation and upon committal of the case to the Trial Court, learned Trial Court, after appreciating oral and documentary evidence on record, has found so many contradictions in the version of witnesses and complainant, who have been examined by the prosecution and the story enumerated by complainant as well as other supporting witnesses, are not found trust worthy. The learned Trial Court has also found that T.I. Parade has been done in accordance with law and considered other factors. Thus, considering the evidence on record, the learned Trial Court, has acquitted all the accused from all the charges.

3. We have heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.Utkarsh Sharma at length, who has taken us through various oral evidence as well as documentary evidence, which are on record. We have independently examined and appreciated evidence of witnesses.

4. Learned Trial Judge, framed charges vide Exh. 12 against the Respondents - Accused for the aforesaid offences. The Respondents Accused pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried. They were tried for the said offences and in order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has examined 20 prosecution witnesses and also produced 23 documentary evidence, which are as under:-

Oral Evidence