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 court's findings.

JUDGMENT :

BIREN VAISHNAV, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Jamnagar in Sessions Case No. 138 of 2001 on 30.07.2003, whereby, the Trial Court has acquitted the respondents-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 324, 325, 326 read with 114 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC” for short) and also under Section 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act.

2. The brief case of the first informant as alleged in the First Information Report which had ultimately given rise to the present appeal are as follows:

2.1 It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant Narubhai Jethabhai Varagiya, a resident of village Dadiya, Dist: Jamnagar has three brothers. On 15-7-2001, at about 7:00 a.m. in the morning, the complainant was sleeping. At that time his wife, Muriben shouted so as to wake up the complainant as his brother was being beaten up in the market by the accused persons. The complainant thereupon got up and immediately went to the market where he found the accused no.2 Aala Bechar armed with axe and the accused nos. 1 and 4 armed with iron pipes inflicting blows on the head of the deceased Punjabhai. That Punjabhai therefore, fell down on the road. The complainant went to him. However, the accused no.4 inflicted a pipe blow on the right side of the head of the complainant and the accused no.1 inflicted a pipe blow on the left hand of the complainant and thereby caused fracture on left hand of the complainant. That the accused no.3 Bechar Paba pelted stones one of which hit the waist of Karsan - the elder son of the complainant. That the accused no.1 inflicted a pipe blow on the head of the son-in-law of the complainant. That the accused no.1 also inflicted pipe blows on Sadurbhai and his wife Devi Sadur. Thereafter the accused fled away from the scene of offence.

2.2 It is further the case of the prosecution that all the injured were taken to Irvin Hospital, Jamnagar for treatment. The police after investigation charge sheeted the accused for the aforesaid offences. Investigating Agency during the course of investigation recorded statements of the witnesses, drew various panchnamas etc. After having found sufficient material against the respondents - accused, charge sheet came to be filed which was numbered as Chargesheet No.107 of 2001.

2.3 Upon committal of the case to the Sessions Court, Jamnagar, the Ld. Sessions Judge, framed charges vide Exh.5 against the respondents - accused for the aforesaid offences. The respondents - accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. They were tried for the said offences and in order to bring home charge, the prosecution examined 10 prosecution witnesses and also produced various documentary evidence before the Trial Court. The details of the evidence led by the prosecution are reproduced in the tabular form hereunder:

Oral Evidences

Documentary Evidence