An appellate court can review evidence in acquittal appeals but should respect the trial court's judgment unless it finds clear evidence of error or bias.

JUDGMENT :

S.V. PINTO, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant – complainant under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge & Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. 2, Bhavnagar Camp at Botad (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 52 of 2009 on 29.12.2010, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 365 , 397 and 114 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the IPC).

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 brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:-

2.1 On 15-11-2008, at around 17:00 hours, the accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5 came from Dhrufaniya village and abducted witness Prabhubhai Tapubhai and took him from the field of the complainant - Madhuben wife of Meghjibhai Dayabhai Makwana and assaulted him with sticks and pipes. The accused No. 4 snatched away the Nokia mobile phone of the complainant. The complainant filed the complaint on 15-11-2008 at the Gadhada Police Station under Sections 365 , 397 and 114 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860, which came to be registered as Gadhada Police Station at I C.R.No. 166 of 2008.

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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gadhada and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Bhavnagar Camp at Botad as per the provisions of Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and case was registered Sessions Case No. 52 of 2009.

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. 7 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs. 9 to 12 wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.

2.4 The prosecution produced fifteen oral evidence and twelve documentary evidences to bring home charge against the accused 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 were recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. 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 judgment and order was pleased to acquit all the accused from all the charges leveled against them.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgement and order of acquittal, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the impugned judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is contrary to law and evidence on record and the learned Trial Court has not appreciated the fact that all the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and during cross-examination, nothing adverse has been elicited in favour of the respondents. The case has been proved beyond reasonable doubts and the pr