An accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and acquittal should not be disturbed without cogent grounds.

ORDER :

1. The present Criminal Revision Application has been filed under Sections 438 and 442 of the BNSS, challenging the judgment and order dated 29.01.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Vadia, in Criminal Case No. 81 of 2017, whereby the accused were acquitted of the charges under Sections 326, 325, 323, 143, 147, 148, 504, 506(2), and 135 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Being aggrieved and the satisfied, the present applicant-original complainant has approached the learned Sessions Judge, Amreli by way of Criminal Appeal No.3 of 2023, which came to be preferred by the State Government and the same came to be dismissed vide order dated 30.05.2024 and acquittal recorded by the learned trial court is upheld and confirmed.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the same, the original complainant has filed Revision application.

4. It is the case of the applicant that on April 27, 2017, the applicant alleges that accused No.1 encroached upon Gauchar land and constructed a residential house. In retaliation for legal proceedings initiated by the complainant in the Amreli court, accused Nos.1 and 2, armed with an iron pipe, along with accused No.3, wielding a cable wire, allegedly assaulted the complainant, resulting in serious injuries, including fractures. Accused Nos.4 to 8 are purported to have abetted this offense. Consequently, an FIR was registered under Sections 326, 325, 323, 143, 147, 148, 504, 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. Following the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed, and the trial commenced. The prosecution examined a total of 19 witnesses, including the investigating officer, which is as under :

5. I have perused the records and proceedings of the case, including the judgments of both the trial and appellate courts. It appears that prosecution has produced the complaint below Exhibit 82, Panchama below exhibit 95 and injury certificate below exhibit 109 and 15 documentary evidences are produced on record. After recording the said statement under section 313 Cr.PC, learned trial court, come to the conclusion and observed that no offence is made out and extending the benefit of doubt has been pleased to exonerate the accused persons as prosecution failed to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt against the accused persons and no any independent witness is examined and witnesses are also turned hostile. Even prosecution failed to prove the nature of the injury. How the offence under section 326 is made out and to invoke the provisions of section 143, 147, and 148 failed to prove that the five or more people with the common intention or with the common object have made an assault. In absence of the any inspiring evidence, the learned trial court has exonerated the accused persons. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the same, the appeal was preferred.

5.1. Upon a thorough review of the entire case record and the evidence presented before the learned Trial Court, the learned Sessions Judge observed significant contradictions and inconsistencies in the statements recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Specifically, the statement of the eye-witness, marked as Exhibit 82, revealed major discrepancies and indications of evidence tampering. Notably, the medical history provid