Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V. PINTO
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Rajubhai Parshottambhai Koli Patel – 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 09.12.2005 in Sessions Case No.15 of 2005 passed by the Presiding Officer, 4th Fast Track Court, Nadiad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’), whereby, the Trial Court has acquitted the respondents – accused from the offences punishable under Sections 452, 393, 398, 120(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’) and Section 25(1)(a)(b) of the Arms Act, 1959. The respondents are hereinafter referred to as ‘the accused’ as they stood in the rank and file in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. During pendecy of the present appeal, the respondent No.2 – original accused No.2 Rajubhai Babubhai Parmar has expired on 28.12.2024. Copy of the death certificate is produced and the same is taken is taken on record, and hence, the present appeal qua respondent No.2 herein – original accused No.2 stands disposed of as abated.
3. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:
3
In acquittal appeals, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings unless there is clear evidence of illegality or perversity.
The appellate court upheld the acquittal due to serious flaws in the Test Identification Parade, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for clear evidence of guilt.
The appellate court must uphold acquittals unless the trial court's decision is perverse or lacks evidentiary support, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
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.
Point of law : where the trial court allows itself to be beset with fanciful doubts, rejects creditworthy evidence for slender reasons and takes a view of the evidence which is but barely possible, i....
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.
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.
In appeals against acquittal, conviction requires clear evidence; presumption of innocence is paramount, and acquittals should not be reversed without manifest illegality.
An appellate court may review evidence in acquittal appeals but should not interfere unless there is manifest illegality or the trial court's judgment is unreasonable.
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
