Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Hasmukh D.Suthar, Pranav Trivedi
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Koli Babubhai Popatbhai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.
1 This appeal is directed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as “the Code” for short) against the judgement and order of acquittal dated 19.07.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Dhrangadhra in Sessions Case No.15 of 2000, whereby, the learned Sessions Court acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 307 and 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE .
2 The following noteworthy facts emerges from the record of the appeal:
2.1 The prosecution case in brief is that the complainant-Hakiben Gagjibhai had illicit relationship with the accused Koli Babubhai Popatbhai of Halvad. They often quarreled with each other during their illicit relationship.
2.2 It is further the case of the prosecution that on 14.04.2009, at about 9:00 PM in the night, when the complainant was present at her home, the accused came on the bicycle and started quarreling with the complainant and on being asked to not to quarrel, the accused got angry on the complainant and in that moment of anger and excitement, sprinkled kerosene on the complainant and set the complainant on fire with matchstick.
2.
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.
The appellate court upheld the trial Court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for credible evidence, particularly regarding dying declarations.
An appellate court can only overturn an acquittal if it finds a clear error or illegality in the trial court's judgment, maintaining the presumption of innocence.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal of the accused due to the lack of reliable evidence and doubts regarding the credibility of witness testimonies, emphasizing that reasonable dou....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and inconsistencies in dying declarations can lead to acquittal.
The court upheld the principle that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, emphasizing the need for compelling reasons to overturn an acquittal based on insufficient evidence.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused, and the s....
The presumption of innocence strengthens upon acquittal, and an appellate court must find substantial evidence of illegality or perversity to overturn such a decision.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and acquittals should not be interfered with unless found to be perverse or unsupported by evidence.
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
