Bulldozers Defy Supreme Court Demolition Rules
13 Mar 2026
SLPs Challenging PoP Idol Immersion Orders Disposed as Infructuous; Liberty to Assist Bombay HC: Supreme Court
13 Mar 2026
Non-Compliance on Counter Affidavits Draws Exemplary Costs Warning: Supreme Court in Gauri Maulekhi PIL
13 Mar 2026
Past Licenses and Undertaking Prove Knowledge of Copyright License Need, Warrant Ad-Interim Injunction: Bombay HC
13 Mar 2026
Acquittal in Predicate Offence, Age, Custody & Appeal Pendency Warrant PMLA Sentence Suspension: Punjab & Haryana HC
13 Mar 2026
P&H HC Flags Inadequate Dog Nutrition at Chandigarh SPCA, Orders Affidavit on Welfare Steps
13 Mar 2026
Interim Maintenance u/s 125 CrPC Must Be from Date of Filing Sans Cogent Reasons: Delhi High Court
13 Mar 2026
Belated Challenge to Arbitral Tribunal Constitution Waived by Acquiescence & Conduct: Supreme Court
13 Mar 2026
Justice Sanjeev Kumar: From Rural Roots to High Court
13 Mar 2026
Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque: Sikkim High Court Chief Justice
13 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Gita Gopi, Utkarsh Thakorbhai Desai
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Budhaji Manaji Thakore – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
GITA GOPI, J.
1. The appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.”) challenges the judgment and order of acquittal dated 5.3.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha Camp at Modasa in Sessions Case no.84 of 1996.
2. The State has primarily raised a ground that the acquittal is contrary to the law and evidence on record. The learned Trial Court Judge has failed to appreciate the direct and indirect evidence to connect the accused for the crime and that the learned Judge has not appropriately appreciated the oral and documentary evidence on record. It is also stated in the grounds of appeal memo that the learned Trial Court Judge has not appropriately appreciated the fact that there is no eye-witness in the present case and the entire case is depended on the circumstantial
In an appeal against acquittal, the presumption of innocence remains until the prosecution proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in cases reliant on circumstantial evidence.
The importance of establishing a clear motive and the need for circumstantial evidence to be cogently and firmly established, pointing towards the guilt of the accused.
In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence prevails unless the trial court's findings are perverse, and two reasonable interpretations of evidence favoring the accused must be upheld.
The prosecution bears the burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in homicide cases, particularly when relying on circumstantial evidence.
Acquittal cannot be disturbed unless the trial court's findings are perverse or not supported by evidence; proof beyond reasonable doubt is essential.
An accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt; the prosecution failed to provide sufficient evidence to overturn the acquittal.
The appeal against acquittal was dismissed as the prosecution failed to establish a clear circumstantial chain of evidence, reinforcing the principle that acquittal enhances the presumption of innoce....
In criminal jurisprudence, an accused cannot be convicted unless guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt; significant contradictions in evidence favor acquittal.
The burden of proof lies with the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and a dying declaration requires corroborative evidence to be deemed reliable.
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
Listen Article