Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V. PINTO
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Vinesh @ Vinu Tejabhai Desai – 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 08.05.2009 in Sessions Case No.2 41 of 2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.17, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’), whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents – accused from the offences punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC’) and Section 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.P. Act’). 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. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:
2.1. The complainant Bhikhaji Nathuji, ASI, Buckle No.8434, Ellis bridge Police Station, Ahmedabad City received secret information that the accused had made preparation for dacoity on a petrol pump and had sharp weapons and chili powder in their possession and hence, on 04.02.2007 at 15
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and only overturn an acquittal if the trial court's decision is perverse or unreasonable.
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 may review evidence in acquittal appeals but should not interfere unless there is manifest illegality or the trial court's judgment is unreasonable.
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 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.
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 upheld the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the principle that two reasonable views should not disturb the trial ....
An appellate court must respect acquittals unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable, maintaining the presumption of innocence.
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
