Back
BIREN VAISHNAV, MAULIK J. SHELAT
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Madhav Govind Sagathiya – Respondent
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 wit
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 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.
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 must uphold a trial court's acquittal unless it is proven to be perverse or unsustainable, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
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 acquittal, emphasizing that acquittals should not be disturbed unless there is clear evidence of guilt, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
The appellate court must uphold acquittals unless the trial court's decision is perverse or lacks evidentiary support, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
It is settled law that if main grounds on which lower Court has based its order acquitting accused are reasonable and plausible, and same cannot be entirely and effectively be dislodged or demolished....
The appellate court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing the necessity of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and respecting the presumption of innocence.
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
