The appellate court must respect the trial court's acquittal unless the judgment is perverse or unreasonable, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the prosecution's burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

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, (Atrocity) Court No. 18, Ahmedabad City (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Atrocity Case No. 29/2009 on 14.07.2010, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent nos. 2 and 3 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 506(1), 294A and 114 of IPC and Section 3(1) (10) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Atrocities Act”).

1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as “the accused” as they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

1.2 During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent no. 1 had expired and therefore, the appeal qua the respondent no. 1 was abated.

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

2.1 On 09.07.1997 the complainant - Bhogilal Dahyabhai Vaghela along with Rameshbhai Shankarbhai, Jayantibhai Khushalbhai, Bhikhabhai Jeevabhai and Dhanjibhai Khanabhai were having lunch at Hotel Gulzar when the accused came and started abusing them and hurled casts abuses and threw them out of the hotel. The accused beat the complainant on his face and chest and the complainant filed the complaint under Sections 323, 506(2), 294(b) 114 of the IPC and under Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act which was registered at Kalupur Police Station I – C.R. No. 3606 of 1997.

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 Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 16, Ahmedabad and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Ahmedabad City as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Atrocity Case No. 29/2009.

2.3 The accused was 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. 4 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs. 5 to 7, wherein, all 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 were recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. The accused refused to step into the witness box or examine witnesses on their behalf and stated that a false case has been filed against them. 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 all the accused from the charges levelled against them.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law and evidence on record and the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the fact that all the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecuti