Back
BIREN VAISHNAV, MAULIK J. SHELAT
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
BAJARANG @ BABU GAURISHANKAR – Respondent
JUDGMENT
BIREN VAISHNAV, J.
1. This acquittal appeal has been filed under Sec.378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the judgment and order dated 25.02.1997 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Porbandar, in Sessions Case No. 10 of 1995.
2. The State is in appeal by way of the impugned judgment before us. The accused has been acquitted of the charges leveled against him under Sec.450, 452 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. That on 12.12.1994, at 4:00 a.m. in the morning, the respondent entered the house of his father, Gaurishankar Rajyaguru with an intention to kill. He, with sickle in his hand, inflicted blows on his father’s head, back and eyes which resulted in the death of the father. Several witnesses were examined by the prosecution. The Session Court, essentially having perused the depositions of the respondents, wife-Varsha, the depositions of the assailant, respondent-brother Somnath and Ramshankar at Exhs. 18 and 12 read in conjunction with the deposition of Police Sub Inspector Shri Chavda at Exh.34 and also the Dying Declaration recorded by the Executive Magistrate in conjunction with the medical evidence of Dr. Vyas who carried out the primary treatment o
The appellate court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for clear evidence of guilt, reaffirming that if two reasonable conclusions are possible, the one ....
The appellate court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing that acquittals should not be disturbed unless there is clear evidence of guilt, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the principle that two reasonable views should not disturb the trial ....
The appellate court upheld the trial Court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for credible evidence, particularly regarding dying declarations.
The appellate court upheld the acquittal due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for clear proof of guilt.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for clear evidence of guilt in criminal cases.
The appellate court must uphold a trial court's acquittal unless it is proven to be perverse or unsustainable, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
An appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and can only overturn an acquittal if the trial court's reasoning is perverse or unsupported by the evidence.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the necessity of clear evidence for conviction and the presumption of innocence in criminal cases.
The appellate court upheld the trial Court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for compelling evidence to overturn such decisions.
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
