The appellate court may review evidence in acquittal appeals but should not reverse a trial court's acquittal unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable or perverse.

JUDGMENT :

S.V. PINTO, J.

1. The present appeal is filed by the appellant State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special Atrocity Case No. 33/2006 on 22.06.2007, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 354 of IPC and Section 3(1)(11) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Atrocities Act”).

1.1 The respondent is hereinafter referred to as “the accused” as he stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:

2.1 On 04.04.2006, the complainant - Manjuben wife of Rameshbhai Bhalabhai Patar was going on the road from Moridad village to Kharedi Village and was on the bridge a little away from Dadvi Village, and at that time, the accused caught the arm of the complainant with the intention of outraging her modesty and it was within the knowledge of the accused that the complainant is a member of the Scheduled Caste and hence, the complainant filed the complaint under Section 354 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(10) Atrocities Act on 17.04.2006 which was registered at Kalavad Police Station I – C.R. No. 45 of 2006.

2.2 The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and after completion of investigation, a charge- sheet came to be filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kalawad and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Jamnagar as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Special Atrocity Case No. 33/2006.

2.3 The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code and a charge at Exh. 5 was framed against the accused and the statement of the accused was recorded at Exh. 6, wherein, the accused denied the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.

2.4 The prosecution produced the following evidence to bring home the charge against the accused.

ORAL EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

2.5 After the learned APP filed the closing pursis, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. After the arguments of the learned APP and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned Trial Court by the impugned judgement and order was pleased to acquit the accused from the charges levelled against them.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgement and order of acquittal, the appellant State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the learned Trial Court has not considered the oral and documentary evidences in proper perspective and has erred in holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubts. The complainant has fully supported the case of