IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V. PINTO
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Patel Narendrabhai Manibhai @ Baghlo – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.V. PINTO, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant – State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) against the judgment and the order dated 08.10.2009 in Special Atrocity Case No.18 of 2016 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocity), 3rd Fast Track Court, Mehsana camp at Visnagar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Trial Court’), whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent – accused from the offences punishable under Sections 504 and 507 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’)and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Atrocities Act’). The respondent is hereinafter referred to as ‘the accused’ as he stood in the rank and file in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:
2.1. The complainant Raghunath Savabhai Parmar has filed the complaint stating that on 23.11.2008, he was at his home and at around 7:45 pm, there was a call on his mobile and his daughte
An appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless the trial court's decision is perverse or lacks reasonable support from the evidence presented.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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....
Appellate courts must not interfere with acquittals unless trial decisions are perverse, respecting innocence presumption and allowing reasonable alternative conclusions.
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 acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence favors the accused, limiting the appellate court's interference unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable or lacks proper evidence.
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.