Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
S.V. PINTO, J
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Mukeshbhai Atmaram Vaghela (Luhar) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This appeal has been 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 Presiding Officer & Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 6, Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirzapur, (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 41 of 2007 on 18.02.2009, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 306, 114 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860 ( IPC ) as well as Sections 3 and 7 of the Prevention of Dowry 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 this appeal, the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 expired and hence the appeal qua the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was abated.
2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:
2.1 The accused No. 1 was married to deceased Pinkyben in the year 2001 and the accused Nos. 2 and 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of deceased Pinkyben respectively. Two months after the marriage, the a
In acquittal appeals, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and can only overturn the trial court's decision if it is unreasonable or perverse.
In acquittal appeals, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and not interfere unless the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable or perverse.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity of proving abetment of suicide beyond reasonable doubt.
In acquittal appeals, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and only interfere if the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable or perverse.
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings unless they are unreasonable or perverse, particularly in acquittal appeals.
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and will not interfere with an acquittal unless the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable.
In acquittal appeals, unless strong reasons exist, courts maintain respect for the trial court's judgment when reasonable conclusions are possible, preserving the presumption of innocence for the acc....
The appellate court confirmed the acquittal, emphasizing the prosecution's failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and reinforcing the presumption of innocence for the accused.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the necessity of clear evidence of abetment for conviction under Section 306 IPC.
The prosecution must provide clear evidence of instigation or provocation for a conviction under abetment of suicide; mere allegations of harassment are insufficient.
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
