IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V. PINTO
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Rajendrasinh @ Ranjitsinh Son – Respondent
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 Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Judge, Mahesana (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Special (ATRO) Case No. 44 of 2007 on 27.11.2007, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 504, 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter referred to as "IPC" for short) and Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “Atrocities Act”).
1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as the accused in the rank and file as they 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 on 27th March 2007 at around 07:00 hours in Sanjay Nagar Society, Ucharpi Road, Mahesana, the complainant scolded the accused as they had burnt the hedge, which belonged to the complainant at 05:00 hours and the accused hurled cast abuses on the co
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 upheld the acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
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.
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.
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.
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....
An appeal against acquittal should respect the presumption of innocence and not interfere if the acquittal is based on reasonable conclusions drawn from evidence.
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.
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.