Back
MAULIK J. SHELAT, BIREN VAISHNAV
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Kushvaha Prakash Motilal – Respondent
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 - Aswinb
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.
The prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the absence of corroborative evidence and contradictions in witness testimonies can impact the outcome of the case.
The appellate court upheld the acquittal due to serious flaws in the Test Identification Parade, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for clear evidence of guilt.
The appellate court upheld the acquittal of the accused due to significant contradictions in the victim's testimony and absence of supporting medical evidence, reinforcing the presumption of innocenc....
Point of law : where the trial court allows itself to be beset with fanciful doubts, rejects creditworthy evidence for slender reasons and takes a view of the evidence which is but barely possible, i....
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings unless there is a clear error or misreading of evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court should not disturb the findings of acquittal recorded by the trial court if two reasonable....
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
