In appeal against acquittal, the presumption of innocence is upheld; interference is only warranted in clear cases of manifest illegality or perversity in the lower court's reasoning.

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 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Special Judge (Atrocity), District Kutch @ Bhuj (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Trial Court’) in Special Case (Atrocity) No.08 of 2015 on 28.04.2016, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents – accused from the offences punishable under Sections 323 , 504, and 114 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’).

1.1. 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. On 26-09-2014, the complainant, Hirbai, wife of Nanjibhai Karamshibhai Garwa, a resident of village Mota Angiya, Taluka Nakhatrana, District Kutch, was sitting at the bus stand of village Mota Angiya, waiting for her daughter, Vasantaben, who had gone to Mata Na Madh for darshan, and at that time, the accused came and hurled caste slurs against the complainant and kicked her in her stomach. The complainant, Hirbai, wife of Nanjibhai Karamshibhai Garwa, filed the complaint at the Nakhatrana Police Station under sections 323, 504, 114 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocity Act, which came to be registered at Nakhatrana Police Station, II-C.R.No.74 of 2014.

2.2. After registration of the FIR, the investigation was carried out by the concerned Investigating Officer and after having sufficient material against the accused, the chargesheet came to be filed before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate. As the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions therefore, after completion of process under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C., the case was committed to the Sessions Court and the same was registered as Special Case (Atrocity) No.08 of 2015.

2.3. The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code. A charge was framed by the learned Trial Court at Exh.3 and the statement of the accused was recorded at Exh.4 and Exh.5 respectively, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses and produced 09 documentary evidences in support of the case.

2.4. After the closing pursis was submitted by the learned APP at Exh.30, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code was recorded. After hearing the arguments of the learned APP and learned advocate for the accused and after perusing the documents on record, the learned Trial Court, by the impugned judgment and order, acquitted the accused.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court, the appellant – State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law, evidence on record and principles of justice. The learned Trial Court has not considered the direct or indirect evidence produced in this case connecting the accused with the crime and has also not appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence on record and has straightway arrived at the conclusion that the prosecution has fail