Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V.PINTO
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Pravinbhai Mohanbhai Vaghela – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.V. PINTO, J.
1. The appeal is filed by the appellant State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Jamnagar (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special Criminal (Atrocity) Case No. 33/2011 on 25.06.2013, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 323 , 324, 504 and 114 of INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 and Section 3(1)(10) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Atrocity Act” for short).
1.1 During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent no. 2 has expired and as per the order dated 21.09.2022 of this Court, the appeal qua the respondent no. 2 has become infructuous and has been disposed off.
1.2 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 On 18.06.2011 at around 19.45 hours, Pritesh - the son of the a
In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence prevails, and interference is only justified if the lower court's decision is perverse or illegal; evidence must establish guilt beyond a reasonable....
In criminal appeals against acquittals, the presumption of innocence prevails and the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; failure to do so warrants upholding the acquittal.
In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence is paramount; the appellate court must confirm that the trial court's decision was based on reasonable evidence before interfering.
An appellate court may review acquittals but must respect the trial court's findings if deemed reasonable and should maintain the presumption of innocence for the accused.
The court upheld the presumption of innocence, affirming that a reasonable doubt in prosecution evidence justifies acquittal, and appellate review should respect trial court findings unless perverse.
An acquittal can only be overturned on appeal if the trial court's judgment was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
In acquittal appeals, evidence must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; presumption of innocence remains unless proven otherwise.
In acquittal appeals, the burden lies on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and acquittals are upheld when evidence is insufficient to support charges.
In acquittal appeals, courts maintain a presumption of innocence, only reversing if the trial court's conclusions are unjustifiable based on the evidence presented.
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.
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
