An appellate court must respect acquittals unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable, maintaining the presumption of innocence.

JUDGMENT :

S.V. PINTO, J.

1. The present 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 Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Sessions Case No. 86/2009 on 28.01.2010, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 323 , 504 , 506(2) and 114 of IPC and Section 135 of Bombay Police 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.

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

2.1 On 31.01.2009, the complainant – Sarfaraz @ Bando Mohammadbhai Mansuri was going in his rickshaw no. GJ- 2-TT-515 along with Shabbirbhai @ Kaliyo Samsubhai Mansuri and Aslambhai Yusufbhai Mansuri to the garage for repairing the rickshaw and between 10.30 am and 11.00 am, when they reached near Sahara Guest House, Kadi, the accused halted their rickshaw and Imranbhai Ismailbhai Ghanchi had a dhoka in his hand and Allarakha Ismailbhai Ghanchi had also a dhoka and abused them as he had got married to a girl from their family. All of them assaulted him and Imranbhai Ismailbhai Ghanchi gave him a blow on his left eye and he started bleeding and fell down and at that time, Shabbirbhai Samsubhai Mansuri and Aslambhai Yusufbhai Mansuri intervened saved him from further beatings. The accused also threatened to kill him and the complaint was filed by the complainant on 05.02.2009 at Kadi Police Station which was registered at II – C.R. No. 39/2009 under Section 323 , 504 , 506(2) of the IPC and Section 135 of the BP Act.

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 the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kadi and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Mehsana as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Special Atrocity Case No. 86/2009.

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. 2 was framed against the accused and the statement of the accused were recorded at Exhs. 3 and 4, wherein, both 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 at Exh. 38, 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 wi