In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence favors the accused; appellate courts must respect a trial court's decision unless proven materially erroneous or perverse.

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 Special Judge, Patan (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special Atrocity Case No. 51/2011 on 18.10.2012, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 323 , 504 and 506(2) read with Section 114 of the 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 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 17.07.2011 at around 09.30 am, the complainant and witness - Gobarbhai Sawabhai Solanki were standing at the edge of their field and at that time the accused came armed with weapons and got angry and the accused no. 1 caught hold of the complainant and as he had a sword with him and tried to assault the complainant with the sword. The complainant bent down and he was not injured and the accused no. 1 slapped the complainant. The accused no. 2 had a stick and the accused no. 3 had a scythe and the accused hurled caste slurs and threatened the complainant that if he would step his foot in the field they would kill him. The complainant filed the complaint at the Shankeshwar Police Station under Section 323 , 504, 506(2) and 114 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act which came to be registered at Shankeshwar Police Station II – C.R. No. 53 of 2011.

2.2 The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and after completion of investigation, a charge- sheet came to be filed before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sami and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Patan as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Special Atrocity Case No. 51/2011.

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 at Exh. 9 was framed against the accused and the statement of the accused was recorded at Exh. 10, 11 and 12, wherein, the accused denied the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.

2.4 The prosecution examined 7 witnesses and produced 8 documentary evidences on record in support of their case and after the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed the closing pursis, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded and after the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned Trial Court by the impugned judgement and order was pleased to acquit all the accused from the charges levelled against them.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly s