The appellate court will not overturn an acquittal unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable or perverse, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.

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 3^rd Additional Sessions Judge, Veraval (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Atro Sessions Case No. 4/2006 on 22.12.2010, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 323, 504, 325 and 506(2) 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 During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent no. 1 has expired and the appeal qua the respondent no. 1 is disposed of as infructuous.

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 30.10.1999 at around 00.30 hours, the accused formed an unlawful assembly and armed themselves with weapons like sticks and iron pipes and came to the field of the complainant and assaulted the complainant and other witnesses. The complainant sustained fractures on her hands and the other witnesses too sustained injuries and the complainant – Maniben Sida Rama Harijan Vankar filed a complaint at Prabhaspatan Police Station under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 504 and 506(2) of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act which came to be registered at Prabhaspatan Police Station I – C.R. No.0173/1999.

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, Veraval and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Veraval as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Atro Sessions Case No. 4/2006 on 22.12.2010.

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. 1 was framed against the accused and the statement of the accused was recorded at Exh. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 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 16 witnesses and produced 24 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 stating that the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law and evidence on record and the learned Trial Court