Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V. PINTO
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Adambhai Abdulbhai Vagadiya (Musalman) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. complainant threatened in office (Para 2) |
| 2. appellant's dissatisfaction with acquittal (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. appellate court's power to review (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. trial court's appreciation of evidence (Para 9) |
| 5. presumption of innocence (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 6. appeal dismissed (Para 13) |
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 Special Judge, Banaskantha, Palanpur (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Special Case No. 8 of 2009 on 28.07.2010, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Section 506(2) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter referred to as "IPC" for short) and Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), 1989.
1.1 The respondent is hereinafter referred to as the accused in the rank and file as he 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 That the complainant Pushpaben Arvindbhai
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and not overturn acquittals unless the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable or unsupported by evidence.
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings unless they are perverse or illegal, reaffirming the high burden of proof required in criminal cases.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the necessity of substantial evidence for conviction and the presumption of innocence for the accused.
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.
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and not interfere with an acquittal unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable or perverse.
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 upheld the acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
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....
The appellate court upheld the presumption of innocence and affirmed the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence against the accused.
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and not overturn acquittals unless the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable or unsupported by evidence.
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
