HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
S.V. PINTO, J
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Jentilal Khodabhai Rabadiya – Respondent
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 accuse
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.
The appellate court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
An appellate court has broad powers to review evidence in acquittal appeals but should exercise caution, respecting the presumption of innocence unless the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable.
An appellate court may review evidence in acquittal cases but should not interfere unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable or perverse, maintaining the presumption of innocence.
In appeals against acquittal, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and only intervene if the trial court's decision is perverse or unsupported by evidence.
In acquittal appeals, presumption of innocence is reinforced, and the appellate court should only interfere with the acquittal if the trial court's ruling is perverse or unreasonable based on the pre....
An appeal against acquittal should respect the presumption of innocence and not interfere if the acquittal is based on reasonable conclusions drawn from evidence.
In appeals against acquittal, conviction requires clear evidence; presumption of innocence is paramount, and acquittals should not be reversed without manifest illegality.
Presumption of innocence is reinforced upon acquittal; appellate courts must not disturb findings if trial courts' views are reasonable and plausible.
An appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and should not interfere with an acquittal unless there is manifest illegality or perversity in the trial court's judgment.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.